IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU ON THE 10TH DAY OF APRIL, 2019 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI MALIMATH AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. G. PANDIT W.A.Nos.4371 OF 2017 AND 5128 OF 2017 (GM-RES) BETWEEN:
1. M/S. KARNATAKA POWER CORPORATION LIMITED A COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF COMPANIES ACT, 1956 HAVING REGISTERED OFFICE AT NO.82, SHAKTI BHAVAN 6TH FLOOR, RACE COURSE ROAD BENGALURU-560 001 REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR AUTHORIZED SIGNATORY D.R. KABADE.
2. SUPERINTENDING ENGINEERS (FUELS) KARNATAKA POWER CORPORATION LIMITED, 3RD FLOOR, SHAKTI BHAVAN RACE COURSE ROAD BENGALURU.
... APPELLANTS (BY SRI. AJAY J NANDALIKE, ADVOCATE) AND:
M/S. ANAND TRANSPORT PRIVATE LIMITED A COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT, 1956 HAVING REGISTERED OFFICE AT MGM-CENTRE, NO.1, 9TH STREET DR. RADHAKRISHNAN SALAI MYLAPORE, CHENNAI-600 004 REPRESENTED BY ITS-
CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER CUM DIRECTOR SRI. V.R.ARUNACHALAM ... RESPONDENT (BY SRI.P.S.RAJAGOPAL, SENIOR COUNSEL FOR SRI S V BHAT, ADVOCATE) THESE APPEALS ARE FILED UNDER SECTION 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE DATED 18/11/2015 DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION NO.33916/2015 AND 33974/2015, CONSEQUENTLY HOLD THAT THE OBSERVATION MADE BY THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE ARE NOT BINDING ON THE CITY CIVIL COURT AND THAT THE CIVIL JUDGE SHOULD PASS AN ORDER INDEPENDENT FROM THE OBSERVATIONS MADE BY THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE.
THESE APPEALS COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, RAVI MALIMATH J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT Aggrieved by the order dated 18.11.2015 passed by the learned Single Judge in writ petition Nos.33916 and 33974 of 2015, by which the petitions were disposed off, the respondents therein are in appeal.
2. The plea of the appellants is that while disposing off the writ petitions relegating the petitioner to the Civil Court, certain observations and remarks have been made, which the respondent is relying upon in support of his case.
3. Sri P.S. Rajagopal, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the respondent’s counsel submits that no such effort is being made. That there is a mere narration of the proceedings. That the observations made by the learned Single Judge, actually does not come to his aid.
4. On considering the contentions, we are of the view, that once the writ petitions have been disposed off, any observation necessarily should not influence any authority. Even if there is any observation which the appellant is apprehensive about, it is needless to state that none of these observations shall influence any authority including the trial Court in deciding the proceedings.
With the aforesaid observation, the writ appeals are disposed off.
Consequently, I.A.No.1 of 2017 is dismissed as infructuous.
Sd/- Sd/-
JUDGE JUDGE NG* CT:bms Page No.4 is retyped and replaced vide Court order dated 15.06.2019.