IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 31ST DAY OF JULY, 2019 PRESENT THE HON’BLE MR.ABHAY S. OKA, CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ WRIT APPEAL NO.2800/2019 (GM-RES) BETWEEN:
M/S. YOJAKA (INDIA) PRIVATE LTD., DORO NO. 3/28/43, II FLOOR ABCO TRADE CENTRE NH66, KOTTARA CHOWKI MANGALORE-575 006 REP. BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR JAGADISH BOLUR S/O. LATE GOPALAKRISHNA SUVARNA AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS RESIDING AT "SIDDI"
FLAT NO. 1006, 10TH FLOOR ABHIMAN PALACE OPP: CANARA HIGH SCHOOL MANNAGUDDA MANGALORE-575 003.
... APPELLANT (BY SHRI YOGEENDRA ACHAR B., ADVOCATE) AND:
THE ASSISTANT GENERAL MANAGER THE CORPORATION BANK PANDESHWAR BRANCH MANGALORE-575 012 ... RESPONDENT THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT, 1961, PRAYING TO MODIFY THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE IN WRIT PETITION NO.30397/2019 (GM-RES) DATED 23/07/2019, BY GIVING A DIRECTION TO THE RESPONDENT BANK TO DEFER ALL THE FURTHER PROCEEDINGS IN THE NCLT COMPANY PETITION NO. NCLTB/CO.P.NO.(IB)142/BB/2019 PURSUANT ANNEXURE-E IN WRIT PETITION TILL THE DECISION OF THE RESPONDENT BANK IN THE OTS PROPOSALS SUBMITTED BY THE APPELLANT COMPANY AND ETC.
THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS DAY, CHIEF JUSTICE DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT Heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellant.
2. By the impugned order, the learned Single Judge has disposed of the writ petition filed by the appellant. The appellant is the writ petitioner. The appellant company was granted the credit facilities by the respondent – Corporation Bank. The substantive relief in the writ petition is in terms of the prayer (a), which reads thus:
“a) Direct the respondent bank to defer all further proceedings before the NCLT, Bangalore, in Ref. No.NCLTB/Co. P.No.(IB) 142/BB/2019 pursuant to the Notice dtd. 30.04.2019 vide Annexure-E; till the decision of the respondent Bank on the OTS proposal letter of the petitioner dtd.03.07.2019 for a sum of Rs.101.00 Crores vide Annexure-J.”
3. As a consequential relief, the appellant also sought a writ of mandamus directing the respondent Bank to consider the proposal letter dated 22nd July 2019 submitted by the appellant Company to the respondent Bank for one time settlement.
4. The learned Single Judge, in paragraph 2 of the impugned order noted that the notice dated 30th April 2019 was issued by the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT), Bengaluru, and pursuant to the said notice, the appellant has already appeared before the NCLT on 10th May 2019. Therefore, while disposing of the writ petition without granting any relief, the learned Single Judge observed that in case, the appellant files objections to the proceedings, the NCLT shall deal with the same in accordance with law.
5. Perusal of the substantive relief prayed for before the learned Single Judge shows that in effect the prayer was for stalling the proceedings before the NCLT. Therefore, the learned Single Judge, after noting that the appellant caused appearance before the NCLT, observed that the objections which may be raised by the appellant shall be dealt with in accordance with law by the NCLT. Once the matter is pending before the NCLT, a direction to dispose of the OTS proposal could not have been issued by the learned Single Judge. Therefore, there is no reason to interfere in the writ appeal and accordingly, the same is dismissed.
Sd/- CHIEF JUSTICE Sd/- JUDGE SN