Disposed

Mrs Momina Rahath v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC8 Dec 2023WP/15122/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Disposes of a writ petition seeking quashing of an order attaching petitioners' property. The court directs the petitioners to submit a representation to the Competent Authority, which will then consider disclosing relevant account statements within four weeks.

What did the court decide?

Petition disposed; petitioners directed to submit representation to Competent Authority for account statement disclosure within four weeks.

Mrs Momina Rahath Vs the State of Karnataka — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2023)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2023:KHC:44731 WP No. 15122 of 2023

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 8^TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2023

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA WRIT PETITION NO. 15122 OF 2023 (GM-RES)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

MRS. MOMINA RAHATH, W/O ANEES KHAN, AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS,

¶9

MR. MOHAMMED SHABBIR ALI KHAN, S/O ANEES KHAN, AGED ABOUT 19 YEARS,

¶10

BOTH ARE R/AT NO.32, 3RD CROSS, RAILWAY LAYOUT, PILLAN GARDEN, 3RD STAGE, BENGALURU - 560 045.

¶11

…PETITIONERS

¶12

(BY SRI. PRAKASH SALMANI, ADVOCATE)

¶13

Digitally signed by PADMAVATHI B K Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶14

AND:

¶15

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA, VIDHANA SOUDHA, BENGALURU - 560 001.

¶16

THE COMPETENT AUTHORITY, FOR-M/S AALA VENTURES LTD., DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (URBAN), BENGALURU, KANDAYA BHAVAN, BENGALURU - 560 009.

¶17

2 - NC: 2023:KHC:44731 WP No. 15122 of 2023

¶18

M/S AALA VENTURES LTD., REGISTERED UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT, 1955, HAVING ITS OFFICE AT NO.403, 3RD FLOOR, 5TH CROSS, 5TH MAIN, 1ST STAGE, 3RD BLOCK, H.B.R. LAYOUT, KALYAN NAGAR POST, BENGALURU - 560 043, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN, MR. NADIM AHMED.

¶19

MR. NADIM AHMED, S/O LATE NISAR AHMED, AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS, NO.403, 3RD FLOOR, 5TH CROSS, 5TH MAIN, 1ST STAGE, 3RD BLOCK, H.B.R. LAYOUT, KALYAN NAGAR POST, BENGALURU - 560 043.

¶20

…RESPONDENTS

¶21

(BY SMT. NAVYA SHEKHAR, AGA FOR R1; SRI. VEERESH B. BUDIHAL, ADVOCATE FOR R2)

¶22

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 ND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASHTHE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 25.11.22 PASSED BY THE XCI ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU (CCH-92) IN MISC. NO. 27/2022, ATTACHMENT MADE ABSOLUTE IN RESPECT OF PETITIONERS SCHEDULE PROPERTY AT ANNEXURE-G, IN RESPECT OF PETITIONERS CONCERN AND ETC.,

¶23

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶24

ORDER

¶25

The petitioners are before this Court calling in question an impugned order dated 25.11.2022 passed by the XCI Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru in Misc.No.27/2022.

¶26

3 - NC: 2023:KHC:44731 WP No. 15122 of 2023

¶27

Heard Sri. Salmani Prakash, learned counsel

¶28

appearing for the petitioners, Smt. Navya Shekar, learned AGA appearing for respondent No.1 and Sri. Veeresh B. Budihal, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.2.

¶29

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners on instructions would submit he is ready and willing to close the account with respondents No.3 and 4, if only respondent No.2 - Competent Authority would divulge the account statement qua the petitioners.

¶30

Sri. Veeresh B. Budihal, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.2 would submit that no such representation is given to the Competent Authority for any such consideration.

¶31

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would submit that the representation would be submitted to respondent No.2 - Competent Authority for disclosure of the account of respondents No.3 and 4 qua the properties of the petitioners.

¶32

In the event, such a representation is made by the petitioners, the Competent Authority shall consider it in

¶33

¶34

NC: 2023:KHC:44731 WP No. 15122 of 2023

¶35

accordance with law and consider only the account statement of respondents No.3 and 4 to be divulged qua the properties of the petitioners.

¶36

If the representation is made as observed

¶37

hereinabove, the same shall merit consideration at the hands of the Competent Authority, within four weeks from the date of submission of such representation.

¶38

With the aforesaid observations, the petition stands disposed.

¶39

Interim protection, if any, shall continue till the consideration of the representation as observed hereinabove.

Ordered accordingly.

Sd/JUDGE

List No.: 4 Sl No.: 3 CT: BHK

Mrs Momina Rahath v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mrs Momina Rahath v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shivakumar Vs the State of Karnataka

Ram Nihin Baalay Vs Megha Bordoloi

Nikkitha K J Vs the Union of India

Mr Raghavan Srinivasan Vs M/S Deutsche Bank Ag

State Bank of India Vs M/S. Sai Ganapath Hotel Pvt. Ltd.

Mr. Fayaz Baig Vs the State of Karnataka