IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 30TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2017 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE A.S. BOPANNA WRIT PETITION NO.1769/2017 (GM-RES) BETWEEN:
M/S. SYNERGY CORPORATION A REGISTERED PARTNERSHIP FIRM HAVING ITS OFFICE AT B-1303/1304 SHANKAR PARK, SHANKAR LANE KANDIVIL WEST MUMBAI – 400 067 REPRESENTED BY ITS PARTNER MR.KIRIT M.SHAH REPRESENTED BY HIS GPA HOLDER MR.JAGANNATH RAI. … PETITIONER (BY MISS. RITHIKA R.K. FOR SRI KUMAR RAM C.M., ADVS.) AND:
1. SMT. RAJASHREE W/O J.RASARAJAN AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS.
2. MS.J.SUDHA D/O J.RASARANJAN AGED AOBUT 37 YEARS.
3. MR.J.ADITHYA S/O J.RASARANJAN AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS.
RESPONDENT NO.1 TO 3 C/O. DECCAN NURSERY, 3RD CROSS, SARAKKI, C.R.LAYOUT BENGALURU – 560 078.
4. SMT.J.MAHISREE W/O LATE SHRI.J.UDAYAN AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS.
5. MR.J.AGASTHYA S/O LATE SHRI J. UDAYAN AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS.
6. MR.VASISHTA S/O LATE J.UDAYAN AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS.
RESPONDENT NO. 4 TO 6 ARE RESIDING AT JAYANTHI BOTANICAL GARDEN, 2ND CROSS, SARAKKI C.R. LAYOUT, BENGALURU – 560 078.
7. B.S.R.DEVELOPERS PVT.LTD., A COMPANY DULY INCORPORATED UNDER THE INDIAN COMPANIES ACT HAVING ITS BRANCH OFFICE AT NO.15 CURVE ROAD, TASKER TOWN BENGALURU – 560 001.
REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR. … RESPONDENTS THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE HON’BLE CITY CIVIL COURT TO DISPOSE OFF THE PETITIONS/SUITS IN A.S.NO.83/2013 AS EXPEDITIOUSLY AS POSSIBLE, AND IN ANY EVENT WITHING ONE MONTH FROM THE DATE OF THE ORDER DISPOSING OFF THE PETITION.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER The petitioner is before this Court seeking issue of mandamus to direct the learned Judge of the City Civil Court to dispose of the suit in A.S.No.83/2013 as expeditiously as possible or within the time frame to be fixed by this Court.
2. The respondents herein have filed the suit in A.S.No.83/2013 under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act assailing the award passed by the Arbitrator.
3. The grievance of the petitioner is that though the suit is filed in the year 2013, no progress is made by the Court below in disposing of the suit. In that view, a direction is sought to dispose of the suit as expeditiously as possible.
4. This Court has been repeatedly indicating that a mandamus to a Judicial Officer should be very sparingly issued, as this Court is confident that a Judicial Officer would keep in view the Board of the Court, the different nature of litigation pending and accordingly, consider and dispose of the matters. That being the position, I am of the opinion that it would be appropriate to reserve liberty to the petitioner herein to file a memo before the Court below indicating the delay that has occurred and the urgency to dispose of the matter. If such memo is filed, the learned Judge of the Court below shall take note of the same, keep in view its board and also the fact that the present proceedings is under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, wherein the alternative dispute resolution is to be expeditiously considered. The Court below shall thereupon fix its own time frame and dispose of the matter within the time frame to be set by it.
In terms of the above, the petition stands disposed of.
Sd/- JUDGE ST