M/S Vidyavathi Trading Company Vs Karnataka Cooperative Milk Producers Federation Ltd.

¶1

1 -

¶2

NC: 2025:KHC:10219 W.P. No.12801/2024

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 11^TH DAY OF MARCH, 2025 BEFORE

¶4

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA WRIT PETITION NO.12801/2024 (GM-RES)

¶5

BETWEEN:

¶6

Digitally signed by NAGAVENI Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶7

M/S. VIDYAVATHI TRADING COMPANY A PROPRIETORSHIP CONCERN REPRESENTED BY ITS PROPRIETOR JANARDHANA .B S/O LATE HANUMANTHA REDDY AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS RESIDING AT NO.62, VISHU NILAYA 5TH MAIN, 2ND CROSS, AGS COLONY ANAND NAGAR, BANGALORE NORTH 560032.

¶8

(BY SRI. KISHAN G.S. ADV.,)

¶9

…PETITIONER

¶10

AND:

¶11

KARNATAKA CO-OPERATIVE MILK PRODUCER'S FEDERATION LTD., A COMPANY FORMED UNDER KARNATAKA CO-OPERATIVES ACT KMG COMPLEX, POST BOX NO.2915 DR. M.H. MARIGOWDA ROAD BENGALURU 560029 REP. BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR.

¶12

…RESPONDENT

¶13

(BY SRI.D.R.RAVISHANKAR, SENIOR ADV., FOR SRI.SUMANTH L. BHARADWAJ, ADV.,)

¶14

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO ORDER/DIRECTION/WRIT DIRECTING THE RESPONDENT AUTHORITIES TO CONSIDER THE REPRESENTATIONS GIVEN BY THE PETITIONER TO THE RESPONDENT (PRODUCED AS ANNEXURE-J AND N) SEEKING EXTENSION OF THE ALLOTMENT PERIOD OF NANDINI DRIVE-IN-PARLOUR DTD 28.09.23,

¶15

2 -

¶16

NC: 2025:KHC:10219 W.P. No.12801/2024

¶17

21.10.23 27.10.23, 24.01.24 AND 01.04.24 RESPECTIVELY & ETC.

¶18

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR FRESH MATTERS LIST, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶19

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA

¶20

ORAL ORDER

¶21

The petitioner is before this Court seeking the

¶22

following prayers:

¶23

"i) Issue an appropriate order/direction/writ directing the Respondent authorities to consider the representations given by the petitioner to the respondent (produced as Annexures-J to N) seeking extension of the allotment period of Nandini drive-in-parlour dated 28.09.23, 21.10.23, 27.10.23, 24.01.24 and 01.04.24 respectively.

¶24

ii) Issue an appropriate order/direction/writ directing the Respondent authority to allow the petitioner to participate in the fresh allotment process in respect of the Nandini Drive-in-parlour - "Ksheera Bhavana Premises", KMF Complex, Dr. M.H. Marigowda Road, Bangalore.

¶25

iii) Grant such other and further reliefs as are just including the costs of this petition."

¶26

Heard Sri.Kishan G.S., learned counsel for the

¶27

petitioner and Sri.D.R.Ravishankar, learned Senior counsel

¶28

3 -

¶29

NC: 2025:KHC:10219 W.P. No.12801/2024

¶30

for Sri.Sumanth L. Bharadwaj, learned counsel for respondent.

¶31

Pursuant to a tender notification dated 04.11.2009, the petitioner was allotted a shop in the KMF

¶32

to vend Nandini Milk products. Initially the contract was for a period of five (05) years which would have come to an end in the year 2014. Again, on 26.03.2014, it is extended for a period of five (05) years which would come to an end in the year 2019. It transpires that there was no further extension and the lease itself came to an end on 30.09.2023 and the petitioner was asked to vacate the premises. It is at that juncture, the petitioner prefers the subject writ petition. This Court, in terms of its order dated 26.06.2024, protects the interests of the petitioner by granting an interim order of stay against the eviction notice.

¶33

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that if the KMF would call for a tender, he would also

¶34

4 -

¶35

NC: 2025:KHC:10219 W.P. No.12801/2024

¶36

participate and till the KMF would call for a tender he should not be disturbed from the said premises.

¶37

The said submission is partially acceptable, the contract of the petitioner is admittedly over, not today, but long ago and the petitioner has been continuing in the said place without authority of law on the score that extension is being sought or extension is granted or on the strength

¶38

of the interim order that is subsisting in the case on hand.

¶39

In that light, the submission of the learned

¶40

senior counsel for the respondent would merit acceptance that they would lease this subject shop premises in a manner known to law and till they lease the subject premises in the manner known to law, the petitioner would not be disturbed from the said place. Learning senior counsel further adds that in thirty (30) days the steps would be taken to lease out the subject premises in the manner known to law.

¶41

5 -

¶42

NC: 2025:KHC:10219 W.P. No.12801/2024

¶43

All these submissions are recorded, in the event

¶44

there is a breach of any of the submissions so made, it is

¶45

open for the petitioner to approach this Court yet again.

¶46

With the aforesaid observations, permitting the petitioner to continue for a period of thirty (30) days or the leasing out of the premises in the manner known to law, the petition stands disposed.

¶47

Sd/(M.NAGAPRASANNA) JUDGE

¶48

BSR List No.: 1 Sl No.: 7

M/S Vidyavathi Trading Company v. Karnataka Cooperative Milk Producers Federation Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S Vidyavathi Trading Company v. Karnataka Cooperative Milk Producers Federation Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Vinod Kumar M N Vs Union of India

Mr. Naveen Kumar @ Naveen Vs State of Karnataka

Sujatha Reddy Vs the State of Karnataka

M/S Anushka Constructions Private Limited Vs State of Karnataka

R Venugopal Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri Annappa Vs the State of Karnataka