High Court Karnataka High Court

M/S Arthik Credit And … vs Shivarama Poojari S/O Rama … on 11 February, 2009

Karnataka High Court
M/S Arthik Credit And … vs Shivarama Poojari S/O Rama … on 11 February, 2009
Author: B.V.Nagarathna
=;i%i§.£'u'.;%'§_Li.ZEiL3iL38 arm? §§"i2.2Cé{%8 <;:.w .'$13.2{){}éE§
~:
.. i ..

IN Tlriiil HIGH UOUR' 1' OF' KAi<NA'l'AKA AT Bfifiifiifibiiiihi

vamp was THE 1 1TH ma' 0:? FEBRUARY.,m2d0§"L;'-.T:.,

BEFORE

THE m.}:~4*m,z:; M;<s.aus'1'1c.L;'B.»*J.mA--§;A;§}r§i¥§i_NAv  V'

(;;

0§ V IN CRP.NO.311[2098 A ._ nmwmm: 1 M18 AHIHIK CREL§1fi"A'fi~l_1§*§»NVb3S'i.'Mii1N'iS{H) NAVUNDA, KuNDg_a?UR Tg_%1,1JI--{"'~ " ;A .. REP. BY ,IfF3.__MANAGrm'} 'PARTNERZ. " SR}. K. as: .S§i}B'I'H}%'JKF;§viA Am{;~A= AGE; «:35 .}'i§-,,&.i§;'S' * 2 Axgggéx is/0 'msc, KRv:sim;A,Au1GA :':'_xGE:'55"'fEAARS_ M % A V . P:§1';':'10r¢:::1-5:5 (B31 Si~i:.1«; M ma%;*A1w, ADV.) A _ s§i'1xfA2§Az9:A mmam S/(J RAMA POOJARI 56 YEARS (}UL*.BIMANE .. M,ARAVAN'l'HA VILLAGE AND P031' KUNDAPUK TALUK SR! M v SATHISH as/«:3 M V§s3NKA'!'A me we NEGiLON¥ HOSANAGAR TALUK {*3 3 SR! P«¥£§.Rz%¥Ai\iA P1} Rflffliii S] (}!.;ATtf3 PARAMESHWARA PURANIK ) R15'? KCILLUR VILLAGE KUNDADUR TALUK :;?}{i«'.?x%0.3L§}.2{}{28 C.W 312.2-fC30i=3 e:'..w .. 2 .. -4 SR1 K BALACHAN DRA BHIDE SIC) LA'i'1:§ A.K. BHIDA Rffif' KOLLUR VILLAGE KUNDAPUR TALUK 5 SR! PSKIDHAK RAG gm 9*, ?#;%A%%:%-55% E-<.fA(}§§}A - i'*'€}i3§'£ &;fi1.':$'i'H§.E%'A t§E.}%.éPi '§'ALUK 5 SM'? SHANMA M :<A0 ._ "- V 3510 PARAMESHWARA PURRNIK we SM!' SHANTHA 591'm:B.3Ax' , V w/() H MADiiAVA--§~i1!;.i:i§5A%s'. ; .. MARAVANTHE VILLAGEAND KUDNAP:,:.3TALui<*'»--3 ' " * " 8 t;_§;5'1' 'v§?]'{)" M V BHAT MARAVA1'£TH.E'..E'iL3g£.GE rm» pus'? KV_DN5P'~'R-:;T5L'VK_ " Z 9 SM1' v1..;m;:{A_ SEVIBRAHMANYA w1;0_:-:.:;; !dRA*I~1M:1N'Y.A'if v MAJOR 2 "Q R 1 iAL C-DU HTS ARE CONSTITUTED UNDER THE I3RC3VlQI()N9 013' THE i~"iLI:},L) u/3.115 my (3943. AGAINSI' '2'!-113; JuDG§:,__ {JR.E)N.) KUNDAPUR, HOL-DING THAT, THE surr IS "?JiA.§NTAiNfi8LE AND 'THIS coum' HAS JUR:stz:<::i'z'0N T0 = _ *i'j<'t°';'}'Hb) Sim', umwss AM) UN'l'iL THE SPi}(3iAL (;<;u:{';':s: "-ARE CONSTITUTED UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF' THE ' V' "IN FINANCIAL l3}.'5'FABLlSi~iMEN'l' AC1'. €;Ti<1§5«'.3\Jc:»..3Li§..;?Z-iL1{3%Z< 43.1»; .3;i;§f.£f{3{}8 s:;t.:»5 §$i3.;§.'<f}{§8 A ..... 'E .. 63 SMT SHANTHA M RAG we PAKAMHLSHWARA ms 1<aN;1A::,.;n< s:r~:::a"vm3~'r'. 10 1M;{ Y 1RJ5":.ng;.4_A:;fvi« "'$[U SE§.A1%~F<'E '- » ' }{ASARG('f)I). fifAI;UK RESPONDl:}N'1'S C)RDER~ ~DA£i-'1A'ED 24.07.2088 PASSED ON PRELIMINARY ISSUE"'iN (.}S.N().190/2007' 0!»! THE FILE CJF THE PRLJEIVIL KARNATAKA PR'C}TECTIC}N OFINTEREST OF DEPOSITORS IN CRP..l'iO.3 13/ 2008 BETWEEH: 1 M13 PsR'£'HiB'. C«k<'.i:}L)i'I' Afii) lNViiZ$'i'Mi5}i'<E'§'SfR) NAVUNDA, KUNDAPUR 'TALUK :;é;R1-3: BALACHANDRA BHIDE £2» SMi*S1r~1AN'1'iriA M mu {I§<3:*.fx2.;3L£L€.2{}{}8 c:..'vi §$l2.2GG8 <":.w' 313.2_'{208 U'? REP. fiY ITS MANAGING PARTNI3}i{ SR1. K.'N'St$b$'l'HARAMA RDiGA AGE; 55 YEARS 2 MR K. N s::;1:r1*HA;<AMA ADIGA Sm rm. KRISHNA ADIGA AGE-2:55 YEARS «_ P?'f£:'.IfIT1{)_N'ERS"'. (By Sri: K M NA"l'ARA.J, Ai)V.T} ARE: 3 AMITA 1:.;1L;.,Avp~.-_ « -. MINOR mgr. BY ms N;f¥1'L;%{A1¢_'{.}BARDlAN AND 1«-'A:1'Hi;:~2 ANi'€AYYA__M BILLA.Vg'ag V AGED «$2:-.YEAR$ ' 2 swig-M i:4§é.':*§--;2is:a .:.f;''/»:; M' \§;*S£\£&<:A'l'A mo R/o.1§JEi_cng3Lor&:' «_ ' ,iH@SA¥;A{;@~;§2..TALU_K 3 7Si~2§ N.'sRA¥n..NA»P%Ls;Ac;E . _ KUNIEAPUR,'-TAL-UK _ _s;gu._L'Af1*b; AJ-<.. as-una " T. _£2gAf1'" KGLLUR VILLAGE « K:}_:qp:g?'UR TALUK 5- 331-?' SREDHAR mo ~~ V359 9. sumsa mama ms'? SASTHANA {mum TALUK I)/O PARAMBSHWAKA PU KANIK SIG P. SUBBA FEAOIDA POST SASTHfiNA UUUPI TALUK 7 SMT SHANTHA M HEZBESAR W]() H MADHAVA HJSLBBAR €j§{E.f€£2.311.E3{3GE§ CA»? 5'_¥1L£3.Cii3{§8 C,i.W 3fi3.;§jQ{§8 _§_ MAi€AVAN'l'H E} Vi3...i.sAGb3 AN 1) POST' EU DNAPU R TALU K 3 SM!' MAHALAKSHM1 v BHAT w /0 M v MARAVANTHE VILLAGE AND POST ' KUDNAPUR TALUK : 9 Sm' VLJAYA SUBRAHMANYA'. ' w,/A0 SUBRAHMANYA Pr'-K ' MAJOR ' R/0 JATHABETTU MUTH-» POST: UPPUR = UDUPI TALUK ANIADIST. _ ., 10 MRYH'i'h}JAS\fl 2 5/ 0 SHANAiiARA§§£fiRAYAN"A_Vi-:$HA'i' ., " R10 YELKISNA i~I(JU:"s'§E P03;-'z MA1R£'--~.. . iii 7' :<AsA':2aG€=i:2:,TAL;5KV"'-- ~ RI:f}SP{)Ni)}:.IN'FS 'nms 6:161-PFlLh?_D"~--._U[S 115 or' 'i'Hi:) ewe; 1908. AGAENST "ORDER mt 24.7.03 PASSEQ ON PRELIMINARY-»§SS'UE em as N0.192/07 on THE FILE OF 'I'!~,{'E"'«:.P:R_I;. §:IvzL"'JI,£pGE, (JR.I}N}, KUNDAPURA, HOLDING """rH;=&*i.' "#9112: 53.13:? 13 MAINTAINABLE AND THIS CGURT HAS '-J{}'i%3Si)j{.£?f"i§)?~:.__'i'{) we»: '1'm«; sun' urmsss AND uzmu. 'l'H-ii} ':sm::g;'1AL.wr:.<3u:¢1§:; ARE (3()NS!'l"l'U'l'ED umnsae 'ma; k--"1<ev1:s:u§q:i;f;= my 'l'Hi:f2 KAi€NA'l'A.KA PRO'i't$C'l'l()N 0:4' tn';-%§;:::;posrm1<s m - HNANCIAL ES'i'A§:iL!f:3HMh}N'i' AC!' 2004 AND wmm 'me: PRUViSi£_)NS my i1'm:;__ :1-mu) AC!' IS INVOKEL}. These CRPS coming on for ADMISSIUIQ 01:1 this day, delivered the fo£Iowing:~-- ORDER

“l’h€:se revision pcfitions raise a common and itieuticai

identical question against the oxtictr dated i34.7.2(K)8 made

by the trial court on a preliminary issue on the:

C:

&
C?

54

‘LL’

5.”:

{an
i’
C?

C
‘K-

§k$.Na.3§i.2$G8 c.w 3i2.2″§’
.. E./é ._
the Speciai Courts have not yet been constittlted under the

said Act. Being aggieved by the said i . on

maixltainabiiity, the defendant has pxeferredf: 4_

petifions.

4. % have heard S1i.i{.M.Natavi:aj,::’it;s:;t7t1«e{i’ .

petitioners. _ ‘V V _ V H V

5. He submits that the ” of Interest

9′-3 13€P°Si’°rS 311 2004 has
been enfomeci and framed under
the said Aet’ Eleuc-::L ought to
have Speciai Court and not
i}efc}i’eA”Viii:£e.: the trial court was not
:31; respective suits; filw by the
re§pon{ie1:t:sf;’were He has dxawn my attention

1{}A5f*ih–e ‘Act, which speaks about the constitution

V Oi’ Court. He therefore, submits that the trial

” . gem get right in boiding that the suits filed 53; the

resgaexgidents in the three revision petitiens were

~ Ifiiaéizltainabie, as them is a bar on the maintainabifity of the

siiif. as per Section 9 ofthe C.%~'{,1, 3.908.

:2/»

i.’R§’.f’»ée3._’%il.2<3{E8 <:.w §i1;»}1.Z£GOEé 23.3»: 3"§.3.2i}£3'r3
_. g ..

ti). ‘faking note of the above submission, the only-‘-.point

that arise for my ooneiazietation ie as to whethe1*T7£he”L:’

court was justifieci in holding in the

maintainability of the suit. ~

7*’. Fmm a perusal of ~1;_nateA1.’i.ai_ fie “it iS’*’

apparent that the peti1:io13,e3r._VVV:A’i:ae;t*ei:rz1 is ” ‘ credit and
investment estabfish1v11e:;f — respondents are
depositors Wi104’ika§.i with the
petitioner on the part of the
with interest, they
had for recovery of money. it is
aiso to Protecfion of interest {:11

Deyesitam .A iilstablishment Act, 23534 has

” a.ssent”ef the President of India on 14.12.2003,

§ic.§§;esg;§1?; said. Act has to be enibzteed oniy fiem the

date onvwhgiefi the State Government Weuid nefify. There is

ea me:’Eefia£ placed on reward as to Whether the said Act has

beefifenfoteed by a notificatien by the State Government.

‘ Be that as it may, under Section 10 of the Act, unieee

the State Gevemment with the concurrence ef the Chief

Justice of the High {jouri of Karnataka £33,’ rnofifieafion