Dismissed

State of Karnataka v. Karnataka Housing Board

Karnataka HC12 Sept 2022WP/5704/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed writ petitions challenging Karnataka Housing Board resolutions to refer disputes to arbitration and subsequent arbitral awards. The Court held that the State Government lacks writ jurisdiction as challenges to the awards are pending before the Commercial Court under Section 34 of the 1996 Act.

What did the court decide?

Petitions dismissed with costs.

State of Karnataka Vs Karnataka Housing Board — Arbitration | Karnataka HC (2022)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 12^TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2022

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KRISHNA S.DIXIT

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO.5698/2016(GM-RES) C/W WRIT PETITION NOS.5699/2016(GM-RES), 5704/2016(GM-RES), 5708/2016(GM-RES), 5713/2016(GM-RES)

¶7

IN W.P.NO.5698/2016:

¶8

BETWEEN:

¶9

STATE OF KARNATAKA REP BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING, VIKASA SOUDHA, BANGALORE-576 001.

¶10

…PETITIONER

¶11

(BY SRI.B V KRISHNA,AGA)

¶12

AND:

¶13

KARNATAKA HOUSING BOARD, KAVERI BHAVAN, K G ROAD, BANGALORE-560 009. REP BY ITS COMMISSIONER.

¶14

M/S ANCHOR LINES, G-1, SUMMER RESIDENCY, KANDAK, MANGALURU-575 001.

¶15

…RESPONDENTS

¶16

(BY SRI. H L PRADEEP KUMAR, ADVOCATE A/WITH SRI. BASAVARAJ V SABARAD, ADVOCATE FOR R1; SRI. UDAYA PRAKASH, ADVOCATE FOR R2)

¶17

¶18

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE RESOLUTION DT.13.1.2009 PASSED BY THE R-1 VIDE ANNX-D RESOLVING TO REFER THE DISPUTE RAISED BY THE R-2 TO THE SOLE ARBITRATOR AS ILLEGAL, ARBITRARY AND WITHOUT JURISDICTION AND QUASH THE AWARD DT.31.12.2013 PASSED BY THE SOLE ARBITRATOR VIDE ANNX-E AWARDING AMOUNT OF RS.2661.52 LAKHS IN FAVOUR OF THE R-2 .

¶19

IN W.P.NO.5699/2016:

¶20

BETWEEN:

¶21

STATE OF KARNATAKA, REP BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING, VIKASA SOUDHA, BANGALORE-576 001.

¶22

…PETITIONER

¶23

(BY SRI.B V KRISHNA, AGA)

¶24

AND:

¶25

KARNATAKA HOUSING BOARD, KAVERI BHAVAN, K G ROAD, BANGALORE-560 009. REP BY ITS COMMISSIONER.

¶26

M/S ASSOCIATED CONSTRUCTIONS CIVIL ENGINEERS AND CONTRACTORS, NO.144, 11^TH B CROSS, VIRUPAKSHAPURA, KODIGEHALLI, VIDYARANYAPURA POST, BENGALURU-560 097. REP BY ITS AUTHORIZED SIGNATORY.

¶27

…RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.H L PRADEEP KUMAR, ADVOCATE A/WITH SRI. BASAVARAJ V SABARAD, ADVOCATE FOR R1; SRI. SHIVAKUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR R2)

¶28

¶29

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE RESOLUTION DTD.13.1.2009 PASSED BY THE R-1 VIDE ANNEXG, RESOLVING TO REFER THE DISPUTE RAISED BY THE R-2 TO THE SOLE ARBITRATOR AS ILLEGAL, ARBITRARY AND WITHOUT JURISDICTION AND QUASH THE AWARD DTD.1.1.2014 PASSED BY THE SOLE ARBITRATOR VIDE ANNEX-K AWARDING AMOUNT OF RS.12,75,62,410/- IN FAVOUR OF THE R-2.

¶30

IN W.P.NO.5704/2016:

¶31

BETWEEN:

¶32

STATE OF KARNATAKA, REP BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING, VIKASA SOUDHA, BANGALORE-576 001.

¶33

…PETITIONER

¶34

(BY SRI.B V KRISHNA, AGA)

¶35

AND:

¶36

KARNATAKA HOUSING BOARD, KAVERI BHAVAN, K G ROAD, BANGALORE-560 009. REP BY ITS COMMISSIONER.

¶37

K H ABDUL REHAMAN SINCE DEAD BY HIS LEGAL REPRESENTATIVE SRI BADRUDDIN, PANJA HOUSE, SOORINJE POST AND VILLAGE, MANGALORE TQ, DK DISTRICT – 575 001.

¶38

…RESPONDENTS

¶39

(BY SRI.H L PRADEEP KUMAR, ADVOCATE A/WITH SRI. BASAVARAJ V SABARAD, ADVOCATE FOR R1; SRI. B LETHIF, ADVOCATE FOR R2)

¶40

¶41

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE RESOLUTION DATED 13.01.2009 PASSED BY R-1 AT ANNEX-J, RESOLVING TO REFER THE DISPUTE RAISED BY R-2 TO THE SOLE ARBITRATOR AS ILLEGAL, ARBITRARY AND WITHOUT JURISDICTION AND QUASH THE AWARD DATED 18.02.2014 PASSED BY THE SOLE ARBITRATOR AT ANNEX-K, AWARDING AMOUNT OF RS.3,32,73,254/- IN FAVOUR OF R-2.

¶42

IN W.P.NO.5708/2016:

¶43

BETWEEN:

¶44

STATE OF KARNATAKA, REP BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING, VIKASA SOUDHA, BANGALORE-576 001.

¶45

…PETITIONER

¶46

(BY SRI. B V KRISHNA, AGA)

¶47

AND:

¶48

KARNATAKA HOUSING BOARD, KAVERI BHAVAN, K G ROAD, BANGALORE-560 009. REP BY ITS COMMISSIONER.

¶49

M/S. ASSOCIATED CONSTRUCTIONS CIVIL ENGINEERS & CONTRACTORS, NO.144, 11TH "B" CROSS, VIRUPAKSHAPURA, KODIGEHALLI, VIDYARANYAPURA POST, BENGLAURU-560 097. REP. BY ITS AUTHORIZED SIGNATORY.

¶50

…RESPONDENTS

¶51

(BY SRI. H L PRADEEP KUMAR, ADVOCATE A/W SRI. BASAVARAJ V SABARAD, ADVOCATE FOR R1; SRI. SHIVAKUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR R2)

¶52

¶53

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE RESOLUTION DTD.13.1.2009 PASSED BY THE R-1 VIDE ANNEXG RESOLVING TO REFER THE DISPUTE RAISED BY THE R-2 TO THE SOLE ARBITRATOR AS ILLEGAL, ARBITRARY AND WITHOUT JURISDICTION AND QUASH THE AWARD DTD.1.1.2014 PASSED BY THE SOLE ARBITRATOR VIDE ANNEX-K AWARDING AMOUNT OF RS.800,65,999 IN FAVOUR OF THE R-2.

¶54

IN W.P.NO.5713/2016

¶55

BETWEEN:

¶56

STATE OF KARNATAKA REP BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING VIKASA SOUDHA BANGALORE-576 001.

¶57

…PETITIONER

¶58

(BY SRI.B V KRISHNA, AGA)

¶59

AND:

¶60

KARNATAKA HOUSING BOARD, KAVERI BHAVAN, K G ROAD, BANGALORE-560 009. REP BY ITS COMMISSIONER.

¶61

SRI.K A ABDUL REHAMAN FLAT NO.421, E-BLOCK, NEELENDRA MAHAL, NEAR COFFEE DAY, NANDIDURGA ROAD, JAYAMAHAL EXTESNION, BENSON TOWN POST, BENGALURU – 560 046.

¶62

…RESPONDENTS

¶63

(BY SRI.H L PRADEEP KUMAR, ADVOCATE A/W SRI.BASAVARAJ V SABARAD, ADVOCATE FOR R1; SRI. K S BHEEMAIAH, ADVOCATE FOR R2)

¶64

¶65

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE RESOLUTION DTD. 13.1.2009 PASSED BY THE R-1 VIDE ANNX-K RESOLVING TO REFER THE DISPUTE RAISED BY THE R-2 TO THE SOLE ARBITRATOR AS ILLEGAL, ARBITRARY AND WITHOUT JURISDICTION AND QUASH THE AWARD DTD. 26.2.2014 PASSED BY THE SOLE ARBITRATOR VIDE ANNX-L, AWARDING AMOUNT OF R.96.25 LAKHS IN FAVOUR OF THE R-2.

¶66

THESE PETITIONS COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN B GROUP THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-

¶67

ORDER

¶68

In all these matters involving common facts & law, the State Government is knocking at the doors of Writ Court for assailing the Resolutions dated 13.01.2009 passed by the 1^st Respondent – Karnataka Housing Board for referring the dispute raised by the 2^nd Respondent to arbitration and for the quashment of arbitration awards made against the first respondent. Learned AGA appearing for the petitioner submits that the very KHB Resolutions are incompetent and therefore, all its fall out including impugned awards are liable to be voided. He also adds that though Government is not a party to the arbitration proceedings, it has locus

¶69

¶70

standi to challenge the instruments in question, as being the funding & controlling body of the KHB, under the provisions of Karnataka Housing Board Act, 1962.

¶71

The first respondent – KHB having entered appearance through its Panel Counsel supports case of the petitioner – Government. However, the second respondent – awardee opposes the petitions contending that the KHB has already filed cases challenging the arbitral awards and the contention of the kind is taken up therein; Government is not a party eo nomine to the said challenge now before the Commercial Court; therefore, petitions are liable to be dismissed.

¶72

Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and having perused the petition papers, this Court declines indulgence in the matter broadly agreeing with the contention urged on behalf of the second respondent – award holder. Now that, the arbitration proceedings have

¶73

¶74

culminated into multiple awards that are put in challenge under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 and it is open to the KHB to put-forth the same before the Commercial Court. Even the Government can seek impleadment in the pending cases wherein challenge is laid to the awards and take up the contentions urged herein for invalidation of the KHB Resolutions and also the awards in question.

¶75

It has been now well settled that an arbitral

¶76

award can be set aside only on the grounds enumerated under Section 34 of the 1996 Act and therefore, other grounds de hors the provision do not avail for voiding the awards vide NATIONAL HIGHWAY AUTHORITY OF INIDA Vs. M. HAKEEM, (2021) 9 SCC 1 . Merely because the Government happens to be the funding agency to the KHB and controls it in terms of the Scheme of 1962 Act, it cannot invoke the writ jurisdiction for setting aside the awards, when the challenge to the same is very much

¶77

¶78

pending and most of the contentions taken up in the

¶79

petitions are already crafted in the said challenge.

¶80

In the above circumstances, these petitions being

¶81

devoid of merits, are liable to be dismissed and accordingly they are, costs having been made easy.

¶82

Sd/JUDGE

¶83