High Court Karnataka High Court

Oracle India Pvt Ltd vs The State Of Karnataka on 19 January, 2010

Karnataka High Court
Oracle India Pvt Ltd vs The State Of Karnataka on 19 January, 2010
Author: L.Narayana Swamy


IN TI {If I IIGH COURT OE” E{A.RZ\J/XTAK/-\. AT BAI\3GAi.OR£*3

I)2;1Eec1: This the 19″” clay Oi”Jz111me’:1ry 2010

BB1′ ORE

‘n~11:«: I–{ON’I3I.Ii MR JUS’I’ICI£ 1.. NAI%AYANA”-§:S_.’§P\!;?&£\¢?VI:\ER’.’ A’

WRIT PE’l’l’£’ION NO.28295;’/OOOQ.,(OM:{R::£3_ax _

BETWEEN

ORACLE INDIA PVT Ijma _ .–

A COMPANY INCOR§’OR_A’f”I’£l)’A_S P[2R«”.if1jH£
COMPANIES Ac’1:..’1955. O1~’R1(:1fa:~A1′ ” ”
ORACLE ‘r13cRN’OLO_C;–.\{ R.ARK-,. AA ‘A ,

No.3. BANNERG HA?1f1’-A.’V*R’OA1;>.’_ ‘– .
BANGAI,O–RI§~56′-6029:” *

HAVRVO ._I_{E.’.C}«I) :’\.’)_TF’I<'_I..f:1}3 A19
3R:;s FL,OQR§':t-\W£NC}';' " '

,' 1FO1"TO$N

351-.– ' '
NEW m«:L_H1 1 OQ

_ _v RRRi<m:SL«:N%:'1«:ii2 EN ms s1«:N1OR MANAGER

LEGAI. 4- R. RAVINIJRA VISWANAH-1

' :.Ac.r;{) A}3OUT'37 YEARS

. .. HEZTETION ER

._ '(7;3;,–15s3I—-I AND ASSOCE./\’I'[£S, ADV. )

‘ –

‘i”E-vi E STATE OF K./«\.R.N/XTAK/’\

REP BY THE PRII\ECIPA.L SI€ZC?f'{l’%I”I’ARY
I)EI3’AR’I’MENT OI” E.-“OVVI,CI{ AND I*1I.ECTRE C ITY
SUPPLY

‘:\/LS. BUILDING

}3A.NGAI.ORE ~ 56000]

BANGALORf€ ICLICCTRICITY SUI¥’PLY COMPANY
LI M {T141 1)

‘ 0 – Ti–‘i’EREON”.

CORI’OR/-XTIS Oi’*’l’lCl£. KR. C!RCLIrZ
l’3AI\EG!–\LORI’C «~ 550001

REP BY ITS

MANAGING DIRECTOR

3 ASSISTANTEXECUTEVE ENGINEICR -V’

ELEC’I’RICAL

SM4. SUB-DIVISION M
BESCOM. BU]-\ COIVIPLEX.

KORAMAN GALA,
BANGALORE ~»560034~V

_ .. R..ES}5?QN
[By Sri N K GUPTA. ADV. FOR ‘R2 3
Sri 2:111–1151212 A1~»1zw1.1;1>. A.G’z>1–.I?_Q1-‘2”-121 )
THIS w.1->. 1s 1~’11;1%;p’ E}N.1)iiE{_:A:§{‘FiC?-I.I~:S 226 AND
227 O1′ Ti–IE _CQNS’1*1’1″U’I’IQN” 1:f~I1;j11:1;”1>RA\r’11\1G TO
QUASH T111.1~j:11*1*1a£;’1-Qrijri–1120123″-1′)Af1>E1′) 13′”—1 AUGUST

20071.1-x’1’_A1\1;{:1G__AA11y–.:1;1a91f1’131: or’ ‘1’1~11«: R2 IJATIFJI) 11111
s1a:1r1’1%i1/11s_1,21§ AND ‘1’;—112 1311.1. 1)/-x’1″{«:1) 1-+91″
s1«:1>’I’1{‘.’;\/1’1i51s:_v1’a..2(1’o.9a’1sS1§’1:1) BY 131’«:s<'":'1«:fN"i 01*' s1~»1012'r CLAIM AND IN'i'ERES'F

.A:{5fFS1"I'I"i'IOI\E COMING ON 1«'01'< P12E1,1M.11\':A_RY

1i»1I:;AR1}\1G_ 0":Ij5'0V'GROUP THIS DAY. T} -1 12 COURT MADE) '1'1~11<:

F0'1,1..c5vy'ING ;

O R D E’, R
Learned cc)1,m.=:se1 for t.}”1 petiiiii()ner files a memo

to wiihciraw the wrii pctit.i(m 1’eserv’1ng }ibe1’t.y to

4

‘…4

prefer app1*<)p1*i21ie appeal/rcprcselaianion bt:f()1'e the

appropriafie aL1th()1'il'y.

Hence, this pet,iti011 is dismissed as –v’\3’it.lv1.clVV1*.:1ix1=l:’1,'”H V’

reserving liberty as prayed for i1=:”t”‘l”1<:.lr11e':'1T1p1iii¢(%t.i()n-.1.i§l.tl’;eAtlivépdsal
of the appeal. Pe1.it:i{;,ne1′ .iémp:iifs’r1’i”i;t._ecl t.(5VV’p1’él’c%1′ the
appeal within four weeks; L

Dvr: V