Allowed

The Deputy Commissioner v. M/S Kushal Enterprises

Karnataka HC16 Jul 2024WP/2719/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Deputy Commissioner challenged a Permanent Lok Adalath order determining liability of the State with interest, citing absence of objections by the State's representative as violation of natural justice despite disputed facts. The High Court allowed the petition, setting aside the order and remitting the matter to the Lok Adalath for fresh consideration with opportunity to file submissions.

What did the court decide?

Impugned Lok Adalath order dated 30.09.2019 set aside; matter remitted for fresh consideration with liberty to file objections.

The Deputy Commissioner Vs M/S Kushal Enterprises — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

1 - NC: 2024:KHC:27604 WP No. 2719 of 2020

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 16^TH DAY OF JULY, 2024

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. V. ARAVIND

¶6

WRIT PETITION No. 2719 OF 2020 (GM-RES)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, MYSURU DISTRICT, MYSURU - 570 005.

¶9

THE TAHSILDAR, HUNSUR TALUK OFFICE, HUNSUR TALUK, MYSURU DISTRICT - 570 071.

¶10

…PETITIONERS

¶11

(BY SRI S.H. RAGHAVENDRA., AGA)

¶12

AND:

¶13

Digitally signed by VALLI MARIMUTHU Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶14

M/S. KUSHAL ENTERPRISES, PROP: K.R. CHIDAMBARA, NO.13/1, 12^TH CROSS, V.V.PURAM, MYSURU - 570 002.

¶15

…RESPONDENT

¶16

(RESPONDENT SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED)

¶17

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER PASSED BY THE PERMANENT LOK-ADALATH AT MYSURU IN PROCEEDING DTD. 30.09.2019, MARKED AS ANNX-B AND ETC,.

¶18

THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶19

¶20

NC: 2024:KHC:27604 WP No. 2719 of 2020

¶21

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. V. ARAVIND

¶22

ORAL ORDER

¶23

(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. V. ARAVIND)

¶24

The petitioner No.1 is the State represented by the

¶25

Deputy Commissioner, Mysuru District, challenging the order passed by the Permanent Lok Adalath, at Mysuru, in proceedings in PLAP No.258/2019 dated 30.09.2019.

¶26

The only ground of challenge is violation of

¶27

Principles of Natural Justice before the Permanent Lok Adalath.

¶28

Sri. S.H. Raghavendra, learned AGA appearing

¶29

for the petitioners submits that though the State authorized representative, appeared on service of notice, subsequently, there were no representations nor any objections were filed.

¶30

Learned AGA further submits that the

¶31

controversy revolves around the disputed facts, unless an opportunity is granted to the petitioners to file objections,

¶32

3 - NC: 2024:KHC:27604 WP No. 2719 of 2020

¶33

the dispute cannot be resolved finally. Further submits that there are similar claims by the respondent herein. The impugned order will have repercussion on the similar claims. It is submitted to remit the matter for fresh consideration with liberty to the petitioner to file objections and to participate in the proceedings.

¶34

Notice issued to respondent on 07.02.2020 is served. Respondent is unrepresented.

¶35

The Permanent Lok Adalath, at Mysuru, after registering the petition under Section 22C(I) of the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987, issued notice to the State. The State was represented through authorized representative. The authorized representative has failed to negotiate or to file objections in the said application. The Permanent Lok Adalath after recording the absence of the respondent has proceeded further and passed the impugned order determining the liability of the State at Rs.1,68,800/- (Rupees one lakh sixty eight thousand eight hundred only) with 15% interest per annum.

¶36

¶37

NC: 2024:KHC:27604 WP No. 2719 of 2020

¶38

On perusal of the impugned order, it is clear

¶39

that there are disputed facts involved which can be effectively resolved after granting an opportunity to the petitioners. This Court is inclined to set aside the impugned order and remit the matter for fresh consideration to the Permanent Lok Adalath only on the ground of Principles of Natural Justice. Accordingly, the following;

¶40

ORDER

¶41

i. The writ petition is allowed.

¶42

ii. The order dated 30.09.2019 at Annexure B

¶43

passed by the Permanent Lok Adalath, at Mysuru, is hereby set aside.

¶44

iii. The matter is remitted for fresh consideration to the Permanent Lok Adalath, at Mysuru.

¶45

iv. It is needless to observe that the Permanent Lok Adalath shall grant an opportunity to

¶46

5 - NC: 2024:KHC:27604 WP No. 2719 of 2020

¶47

both the parties to file any further

¶48

submissions or documents.

¶49

v. The matter shall be re-considered afresh without being influenced by the findings in the impugned order.

¶50

Sd/- (K. V. ARAVIND) JUDGE

¶51

DDU List No.: 1 Sl No.: 20

The Deputy Commissioner v. M/S Kushal Enterprises

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The Deputy Commissioner v. M/S Kushal Enterprises

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

J. Parameshi Vs the State of Karnataka

Farathulla Syed Vs the Regional Passport Officer

S. M. Naveen Kumar Vs the State of Karnataka

C K Suresh Vs State of Karnataka

B.S. Srinivas Vs State of Karnataka

Sri Mathew Thomas Vs the Union of India