ax: THE HEGH SOUR? GP' KARNATAKA AT BANQ§%'sE;_{3E§E
Datezi: 13:}: BAY OF JULY :2c;§<::§" '
Before '.
HONBLE E\r1r.JUS'I?EJC3E1'V..{}G&PAEfi §'frO§VL';§
WRIT psrrrrozsr No.»i::%2g*.g¥0é§{§;ézwn,;:,»A / . ..
HETWEEK:
'M/s.Accr::rci Advertising ?vt;"'i;td:;-,
No.8/3,F~1,SaiVi}1a~_':" "
Weed Sweat, Ashssk Nagar, 5'
Ba11ga10re«~56G~_O25 _ '
Rep§"eseI1tc:d. £=3€_V its 1
Sarzior EX$;C~'.L_,'L{i$i§ .,
Mr.Aa1ok:'Br1a;rga»s:aj.'*-L%jT:.%V 3 PETITEGNER
""" " * ;i*;:iL£1}€}i§?'V4Associates, Advs.)
1. Hii'zg:1¥;13ta11_ £5;(*;I'¢:2{i4:'§=.utit:s Linfzited {BC}
. ., Legai. a :1tE..EZst§ate"'
» ¥**i1na12apura _
' iflafigaiare 95560 O1'?
» .. Rap:r;r3;'S§:1ted by its
' ...S-xzxiitai'-Manager {P & A}
?s?i;3.;'f$.'§f€1Inux12g3.n.
2. H "'§fh?e Estate Qfficer,
'v¥:Zindu$tan ficronautias Limitad {BC}
Vimanapura,
Bangalorefiéfl O17. RESPONBENTS
{B}; Sri S.R9.§ssh€kar adv. for
M /' $.81:-.1,ck Seats Law firm.}
\(\/
WP is fflsd under Aificias 226 55 22%"-.}:;f"'Vv:he
Ccnatitufion of Emiia graying £0 quash tii<:*;'«.. g'm__:1c:Wif£1g:~ . " '
This Wzii ;::eti'fi:;3:j.1 is" 'wiokéguash the
proceezdings at and orcisr
Aflfl6XfiI€"G '};T5i2(§éi8 L'-' -V I3;:...:r3§1§neXure--F t1'i€ 23¢
fiéici that the Conterztions
Z " V Inaintairzabfiiigv ef the
procfietijrigs b$f§>1"¢§h_ii:i;s_ivi}i be considered aieng with the
1I1s;r'i'::s_ 0:" §_'£::==_ {:'a;:3r:. V" Therefere, a furthar prayar is 31%
«:1Vié1s.ieE" "Q16 gjetitioner to dire/{:11 2131 r6Sp<)ne:ien¥: £6
.£::1':_,::}$1':,ié3"., _ mairztajiaabiigity issue fiI'S¥Z and than
pf'0c&::_:'d' fzirther in the ixzatter. In A:mexure~G, the 2%
A.E"f??S§'(}f}L{Li1;fi3§1'E direated the petitianer hzarsigq 1:9 prapara and
' "' fi1z'1iish questiamzaire to '£235 firs": respondent ta answer
-“thfi Same.
2. Learglad S{iI1§;G¥” coufise} Evir.S.I’§.%?si§ur:hy for 1:116
pfifiiiéiiflfii’ has submittsé that iicerzse is :13: igsuaci ta
‘m/
4
dacided sixnuitanaousijgz”. H6 has further Submitted that
the ieariimd Senior Cmmsei for the petitioner was
ajilewed £0 cr0ss–examine the witxzesses ans; 01113:
ihereaffier the coimsei for the petitianer was to
prepare and furnish the questionnaim. 5{‘1E1ere:ii3é?e,
learned counsei submits prays..Vfar».d;isn3;is$é§1Tbf Vi’.11@%:«.w:’it,V’L. ‘
petition.
4. The prucaedirzgs» i]:§fiI3FQ1V€A.fiI}3~I3(;1€£i§ iififiificétionfi’ V
of levying penalty .-»:a2.:.’:0z11j:?;”*’z1.$’- f§:Qpos¢d”-71nAv”E1€11e shew
cause ndtiée. (if _’ the parties ham to be
i of the
1§im.’:::&:;*,’ kiabiiity of the petitianer E1} the absence of
.A d.e}iver’§} Gf possession af Siffifs i3 3130 an impcsrtant
‘ aspéct. Thgrefare, the 2″ respandent has to consider
” ~ t}”1es€ aspérzts along with the merits of the case 31%
c:<3rz'a::t. Withgnut considezing these aspects, me
impugned proceedings and grder passeéi by $136 23*'-
\{x\,[
3
responder}: amourxts ti} vialajtive of principias of natural
justicé. That apart, 2% respondent ought not to have
éirected to prepara and furnish questionnaire as-psi’ thé
impugned order dated 24.11.88 at fl;I113€XLx1;f <~::":x'£'3f;e
procedure adopted by him is COI}iI'aI'}7 to V ' 'V "
55. P01′ 816 reasons statefii fifiozrg, V{5)Vf”3:iVZVi§i.iVf}£i1
is aiioweci and the irzipugned prcs§éediz1g$ g::id or§;i;ei’~vaih-1.
quasheé. The 211$ respaiiriéizf di”1″£,3′::’1:_<§Ci»?}f3 ck':-;1Sic1e1"' thzé
aforementioned asgzzézsts ar1ppéf._%sfv§§;1:&sses of tbs first respendem;
and aim’ perfizif’ .§v’i.ti’§::$s if an}; by the petitiorxer in
j1;:a§tiii::’ation”‘n aizd 163:3; fif penalty apex}
” ._i£§g~p7e:§’::en;§r’V.wit1fi:1 six weeks from the date 01′ reseipt
aféia €::§Ap}r-“éVf £3133 C}2″‘{3_(§§’.
sd/~
Judge
MP/Ck