{"id":66475,"date":"2010-01-25T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2010-01-24T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-l-venkatesh-nayakaso-laxma-vs-union-of-india-on-25-january-2010"},"modified":"2017-06-23T09:51:11","modified_gmt":"2017-06-23T04:21:11","slug":"sri-l-venkatesh-nayakaso-laxma-vs-union-of-india-on-25-january-2010","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-l-venkatesh-nayakaso-laxma-vs-union-of-india-on-25-january-2010","title":{"rendered":"Sri L Venkatesh Nayaka,S\/O Laxma … vs Union Of India on 25 January, 2010"},"content":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court<\/div>\n
Sri L Venkatesh Nayaka,S\/O Laxma … vs Union Of India on 25 January, 2010<\/div>\n
Author: V.Gopalagowda And A.S.Bopanna<\/div>\n
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE\nDATED \"1\"HISTI~1E 25'?\" DAY 0? JANUARY 201 \n\nPRESENT\n\nTHE HONBE.-E MR. JUSTICE V GOPAI;AC4{C}W'['\u00a7tA_r*<,4A**:\u00ab'._\u00abNo: 14:3. 8"" BLOCK\nCPWD % QUA'_'_m_'1\u00ab:~;2's\n DOiV{_LURU. " V T\n. BA.NG'ALC3RI3v 2; 560 071\nv ~~   Pr_~:'mI.0N\u00a3\u00ab:R\n\n   5f(z3YS'r\u00ab':1 P~A-KULKARNE. ADV.)\n\n\n\nAND I\n\n3 UNION OF Il\\EDiA\nBY ITS SI9ZCRE'l'ARY\nD EPARTM ICNT OF PERSO\u00a7\\ENI:\u00a7L\nAND TRAINING. NORTH BLOCK\nNEVV I)ELi~iI W E 10 001\n\n2 Ci'2N'I'RAL A1:)MIN1s'1'm'1'ivE 'IfRii\u00a7'3'U<NAI;. \nPRINCIPAL BENCH   A Z  '\nBY ITS PRINCIPAI- Ri'<:Gis'1'RA.R'; \nNO. 51\/35. FA.R}.DKO'I' i:~zi2A\/ HEAD OF OFFICE\n;  \" -._  RESPONDENTS\n\n  :'i3Y\" 'SR1  V\"A5ui2)i;\\}2\u00a7'i1i2ir\\o. ccsc.)\n\n._ '--\"__f1*1---MS-\u00abxii\/1{'i'jiv'w\"i>ia'rmoN IS m.1+:{) UNDER AR'I'lCI.E 225\nesz 227 oif\"*z':i_2a.i'\u00ab: COi\\ES'l'I'l'U'E'ION 0;-=' iNDiA PRAYING TO\nQUAEBI--1'Efi~i[i.OR.[)ERDATEE) 18.8.2009 ;>Assr\u00ab:I:) iE\\3 cm. No.\n\n_  \".1357\/20~O9'\u00ab;_ BY Tl'-IE \u00a7\"IO':\\VlE3[.i3I CAT E3Ai.\\\u00a7GAl..C)RE IBICNCH\nH \" 'V V  VBANGALORE. VIDE ANNEX\u00ab\/--\\.\n\n This petition coming on for I\")i(ti;aiing Orders. this\n\n  V. GOPALAGOWD J.. nmde {he following :\n\n\n\nin\n\nORDER\n<\/pre>\n
This petition is filed ag.{a1i1’1st. the order clateci<\/p>\n
18.08.2009 passed in Original Applieat.ion <\/p>\n
by the Central Admi11ist.1’at.ive Tribunal.\n<\/p>\n
Bench. Ba1’1ggz1l()1’e {herei1’1aft’.er refe.I’,1fed {(3″‘2’1’s;.2’_’v’C}3x’If” .11; <\/p>\n
s1″1ort). The petitioner is before t~his;”CL1s grciunds.<\/p>\n
2. The brief 1″c.’..'(‘.’t:.-::s.._”..’i211*l.’dC’Iv’1.’A};’1\u00a7.3__’_V thei**ivg1_i_”lvegal e0ntee1’1t_.i0ns urged on behalf<\/p>\n
.’–._ot’I.t:l*ie.  im_d 211:’-30 to examine the e0r1’ee.tness of the<\/p>\n
or.de’1*”0f t}1’e.f’C.\/3’1′ in I’C’I.l.1l’I1i1′}g the original 2=tpp1i(:at.i0n to<\/p>\n
‘the pet;;it:ie;_1’}.e1* to present it before the proper forum. The<\/p>\n
‘fp.rrit.m’ia1<\/p>\n
_}t_t1’tsdt(‘tsic.n’1 to exantiate the case and pass \u00a3:1p].)1′()pI’i\u00a31t(‘.<\/p>\n
orders. He? has p121(..'(‘.d st.1’o1’1g reliattcc? upon Rule 6(1) (i)<\/p>\n
& (ii) of CAT [Procecl1t1’e) Rules, 1987. in sztpp()1jE} ()-i:’_:1″1\u00a7_s<\/p>\n
sttbrnissions.-3. he has plztced 1’e1iaI”:ce upon t1’1.<\u00a7__ t"c')'i"l'-i:'\u00bbjVwi_i'1;';__.'.-;._._"' .<\/p>\n
decisions of the Apex Court:\n<\/p>\n
1) KUNJAN NAIR SIVAR.\/s’vtAN’ss\u00bb._’NA’tR”‘]’vs\u00a5;.s_j<\/p>\n
NARAYANAN NA1’f\u00a7’At\\t1)  tJ1*t:i\u00e96p4m–vhsc
\n386}: t  <\/p>\n
ii} KAt\\31)1MALt;AfT-mttQ3H;W;5;t1’Af+\u00bb _& CO. vs.<\/p>\n
VV[q’1\u00a3gj.1I.VO’I'{1V:’A{J:”‘ImSURAN’\u00e9E C0. (2009)? scc
\n ‘768t*     2
\n_iii_) NA::At9PA”tv.vs” GURUDAYAL SINGH (2003<\/p>\n
V   rt2tscc\u00a7’2’r4’j<\/p>\n
‘V’t:g)”sh{i5w_:’t_hAa’i’ VVtt1ve\u00a7..ot’de1′ impttgrted in this writ. p<–3t,it:i01'1 is<\/p>\n
Viiii\u00e9tteci in i\u00e9j1.:u?. It" is 1’r;ier””‘r’1–o.t: o71_;11y_.err(.sr:e0.I\ufb02f2w$.x’-.<\/p>\n
but also st1!’fe1’s from error iI’1:’\u00abv1E,1″>.V.A. He -1.1-;t::-‘:~.,t_’&_>::gj”V<\/p>\n
requested this Court to set:  the s.23..r11e
\nthe petition and retnsmd t’h6′  to \u00abthe. “CAT for<\/p>\n
1’eens1’de1’ation. after exahiiiiiyteig t:\u00a71@\u00e9’– .i”11.&’tt{:\u20acl’ on merits<\/p>\n
and to d1spOSe..O’f,._I’.i’f1–\u20ac s\u00a3:1_me..:’..’<\/p>\n
4.”, Sri MiV\u00e9i&3_l:IC\u00a7\u00bb(TVg._1@21I’I1\u20acd Counsel appeari1’1;_._\u00a7 on<\/p>\n
behaif of  has sought’ to justify the<\/p>\n
 l’ir1di.:igs and 1’62:-sQns’I’et%()rded by the CAT in its order<\/p>\n
 which 11;1’sh.ei’d__tha1t. CAT has no t.er1’it01*ial _;L:.1*isdict.i0n<\/p>\n
I0′(:11\u20acE’1’I”\u00e91i-fl} the origins} Appliezition of the petiti0r1e1*.<\/p>\n
‘.VHa1v*ih5; fcigtifd to the ttndisputed fact: that the order 0!”<\/p>\n
fi’\u00bb:*\u00e9u’is\u00abifer was passed by the Chairman. CAT. Niew Delhi.<\/p>\n
‘ “the (‘E11180 of acticm arose at New Deihi and si1’1(‘C the<\/p>\n
\\t{\\[<\/p>\n
pet’itione1* 11215 reported at Allelhalaad Bem.’}’1. part cause
\nof ~’:1(‘.1i()l’] muse at Allallabeld I~3ench. ‘i’he1’ef(..)1*e. 110 (#211139<\/p>\n
of acticm or part (fa11se of action arose at Bz;11’1g’_.:v1~J,g)’1=.r;?Tto<\/p>\n
maintain the o1’igin’c1I ‘c1ppHC\u00a311’.i(‘)I’1 S{%ekiz’1;_;”_-‘:.I()’uqiljash-.–_ ~-<\/p>\n
eit}’1er the 1:-z’111sfer order or the ()_1_fd.(‘l_’_ of :*(\u00a7;\u00a7_;(‘>ift=Ai:(:)v11.V(2f_’t.}’}e_ V<\/p>\n
1’eprese11ta1t’i(.)11 of the petil.i0n.e1’\u00b0abeib1″e f1’1~\u20ac”A’B\u20aci\u00a31g\u00a3i\u00a7'(.).1;\u00e9:f–:<\/p>\n
Bench. He fumher piaced stfz’:)_;ig. relieince.VL1por1*Ru\u00a7e 6 of ”<\/p>\n
the Rtlles 1’efe1’1’e.d to S_11p1″d ‘cV;r1d:.\u00e91}_s'(>\u00bb.._the Cif’.”‘(?.!’.,5iQi’\u00a71 of the
\nHumble Supreme Co1,’1h\ufb01’h in” UP VS. RAM<\/p>\n
NARESH LAL Y 1:\u00a2po;~t;eec;t’i\ufb01 tA;R_::1’Q;7.Q Seizes in support:<\/p>\n
of the:’fi11d’i1A1.gg5s_  by _t’.he CAT in its order in
\n1’e11e1r1’1ing the ()1*1g1:71f\u00a2.1.1 a{)plic=ai’ic)r1 to petil.i(.me1* to enabie<\/p>\n
him to _Vpresei1t ii,w .lj.et'()ite the appropriate forum. Furt}’1e1.-<\/p>\n
“he ‘ts-21:9. $\u00a7’t.1bl’}’]iti@d tfh\u00e9it Rule 6 of the RL11es is very Clear<\/p>\n
“e.aj;:pli(t21ti()11 ordinarily to be filed by an<\/p>\n
elppi-ig::21r1ti ~w9i4i.;’h the Registral’ of the Bench within wl’1ose<\/p>\n
 Vj’11nrijsdic1;i.o”11 the cemsse of 2’1ct1’or1 wholly or in part has<\/p>\n
 _  in the ins\u00a3.a3″1t case. the petit:_ione3′ he:-ts .2-1h’eady<\/p>\n
  .!i,>e.e11 p<.)st':ed {'0 CAT Bc21'1 l12:1ba1d and that bench<\/p>\n
has got. jm'isdiet'ioi1. The cause of action slionlcl have<\/p>\n
()('Cl.11'l'\u20acd wholiy or in part: at. Bangalore to i11voRe"\u00abt'h–s:<\/p>\n
jurisdiction of the CAT Bench by the pr;\u00a7i.:iti()iTief'<\/p>\n
Bangalore. In View of 1'. he 1iri<:1i::sp1..:te\u00a3i-.faCtT_ li1v'<'4l'.1'A"'i:,'{'*'sf_' "or__{.1_ei'…<\/p>\n
of transfer was accepted by the zi';.)pii_(:\u00e91I1t.. \u00e91i1'ci–.1fe.p(';1:'t\u20ac:Ci"w<\/p>\n
for duty at Allahabad  1,h.\u00a7i1   sjgot,
\njurisdiction in View ()tf;,i{n1e  (i)Aj'(;i;yt Rules.<\/p>\n
\nThe question with   of locai\njurisdiction in,   there is no\nanibigtiiiy    regarcl to these\n  has righily I'\u20ac?l.1lI\"I1\u20acd\n<\/pre>\n
the ()i’igg:ii:i%-ii’–  petitioner to enable him<\/p>\n
to pres3ei’it ii ._\u00a5)\u20acf(i\u00bbi'(‘  proper forum. it is furtzher<\/p>\n
Ah’:-:onVt:end3E:d  hir*nWAt:hat the cieczisions upon which<\/p>\n
A*re1iar1ee_””is 3i2;1.f..;=.eci b the learned Counsel for the<\/p>\n
pE?ti”l”.~i_(‘)i’1(f_’:1″ .t1Tz1\\!e no application ‘to f’z-1(‘:ts of the case.<\/p>\n
herefore: he }’ia=1s i’equestecl for dismissai of the writ<\/p>\n
_’  p-:_\u00a7t.’ii. ion.\n<\/p>\n
\\\/<\/p>\n
5. With 1*efe1’enee the ztbove 1*:’\\-12,11 legal
\n(‘()l’1f.t’1’1′[iO1’1S. we are required 1.0 exarnine the e0r1’ect’ness
\nof the finding of the CAT. B.’:11’1gEi](I)I’\u20ac Bench in re11.1r___1’1ing1<\/p>\n
the original applicat.i()i1 to the pet.ii:’one1* 10 e1’iei,.i_’)”i\u00bbe:”fhiizi<\/p>\n
to present. it before the proper fomrn hOldi}’]g;j:’f,’i”1E?.I:’7Tifhihii\ufb01” V’<\/p>\n
no territorial jurisdiction for the -i’E”&1′.’;I=()’1’1S~”4I'(\u00a5(j6i”d’CdVV by, if-<\/p>\n
in the impugned order. On lAhCb’–b::’n1SiSb.'()_f’llh\ufb01 “ifi\\.’.ail’v.<\/p>\n
c:o1’1t:e1’1iii0ns the following p0in’t.\u00a73 wdc1._ld  fdf our
\n(:01’1sideration :\n<\/p>\n
1. Whether the e2;11.i_se 0-f7:1:tftiiQ1i’-\u00e9iiiose in pan. 21′!<\/p>\n
 iiii   01′ 1i’21nsi’e:* was
\n ‘  at [:32-inge-1I<)1'e'?\n<\/p>\n
2.  tihe” “\u00a3’:i”i’1(1iiigA._\u00a7 re(:0rc.ied by’ Q\/Y1′ in
\n hvpldiing’ ‘1’.%1.2.i._I\u00ab’i{ has no jL11’iSdi(‘.1.i0n to enierlalin
\nV”i’IV’1′:%.*’:”‘original applieaiion to examine the
\n 01′ the order 01′ Li’zn’1sfe1′ ancl<\/p>\n
 1′.\u20acf_”i.\u20ac’_'(I’.Ii()11 01’\u20ac.!er of the re;.)1’e.<;enia1.ion is leggzil
\nand valid'?\n<\/p>\n
H 3. What o1*de1*’?\n<\/p>\n
\\\\K\/\/<\/p>\n
6. Poims 1 and 2 are i1’1tc1’1’e1z1t’ed. ltcttce they are<\/p>\n
artswered t(t)get..i1e1′ by l’CT(T()1’diI’1g_\u00a7Ih\u20ac followmgz l’e?:\u00a71s()11@\u00a7’;-, ft.<\/p>\n
is 1″1C(‘.t.’SS\u00a311’y for us to ext.rac1 Rule (3′{1)\u00abV…..()’\u00a3’7..’L’1.?fx’<\/p>\n
(Pr<)('tcciu1'e] Rules 1987 W1"1i(.'h 1'e21(1s as he1'\u00a7*_t.ti'a{tc2'15i '~<\/p>\n
"6 P]d('t' of f'i1i1'1g ap},)1ikj2:1ti:(:),1T1\u00ab.{v
\napplioatiort shall ordir1_a1'ily b\u00e9"–filed b}\/:':1ri
\nz1pp1i(:2mt' with the Regi.:\u00a7t~.i;1r  S<\/p>\n
within whose j1.11'i\u00a7sdictior_1_:_ <\/p>\n
i} the a1pp1i<1.211'jt.'M  ";'._1r'\u00a7iL:st'ec1_Vftnj.the time<\/p>\n
bei1'1g\u00a7;–r.')r<\/p>\n
(ii) t;}’1’r;*”‘zj_eit;1::;’\u00e97 k’)ti:_a\u00a7\u00a7’t;’i()1’1–L’ x:%;_11Q_I}y or in part.<\/p>\n
hasj\u00e9v zi1’i~$_(3.’r1 ” ”\n<\/p>\n
7.  ‘Rti}c$’ at 1}}<\/p>\n
i-i)””t–s_Ezt\ufb01plitiztlalt? in the I’act.s and<\/p>\n
ui1*(*1.1mstz11’1(‘:cS V-.1f_\u00e9.’ \u00bb’i”‘he ph]’21S\u20acS use<:i under clause (ii) of Rule<\/p>\n
H  1},i__s. 'th\u00e9 cattse of a<'.t:i0n. wholly or in part. should<\/p>\n
.j_h\u00e9&v\u00e9 \u00e9risen'. It is 21 well sett.le(1 princriple of iaw that<\/p>\n
F" .\n<\/p>\n
each phrase 01″ worci used by the legislature in 21<\/p>\n
stzamtoly ;:>mvisic:)n is with 21 de\ufb01rlite purpose and bjs:(.*t.<\/p>\n
It is not U16′ (tzisra of the peti1i01’1e1′ that (hf?_.C\u00e9tLlVi\u00a7E?:7\u20ac)f”V<\/p>\n
action wholly arose at Ba11,<.;;a1c)rt*. The c: \u00a21sc?f(3f'L'\u20ach(%–..j<\/p>\n
petitioner  ihaltz part of the c:a1L.1s;'\u00e9 of' 'z1<:t1~<_)11~: 'i?1a1jsf7tr2i;1sf’e1″  Se\ufb01r\u00e9ii\u00e9<\/p>\n
upon the pelnioner. The 1egaI”L’L;.)ds;it.ionV”in ‘tTh–iV;~’.s :’\u00e9::,g’211-d is<\/p>\n
no longer 1’es–i111T.egra. T1’1V\u00ab;_=. S1_:ipr_c{ms:_ Ctmrt. in the case of<\/p>\n
BEKASH BHUSHAN GHQSHVV  NOVARTIS<\/p>\n
INDIA LTD AM)  ([izo0′”;’\u00b05’sCc ‘\u00a339.15; has mren~ec1 to<\/p>\n
the ()bsj;%\ufb01\/H\u00e9iT’i(>I.:i\u00a7.sfv   case of WORKMEN
\nvs. SR1 ERANGAVVII;\ufb01S EV1\u00a7”i7ORS (P) LTD reported in AIR<\/p>\n
1967  1049 V_\\:}\\rl”1.:\u00e9fcii’1.  Apex Court had an ()c”_:<*.asi()1'a<\/p>\n
 'm Ac':2"t_ween ihe<\/p>\n
 t\u00a7’:a1’1a1g;e*t’;1.\u00e9r11. and workmerl in that (raise. In the BIKASH<\/p>\n
T.i\u20ac3\u00a5f\u00a5”L\u00a7s.i4l1A:\\1’ss (_?.2~1.Sc’-? SR1  11As MOTORS {PVT}<\/p>\n
I,’FE”).. case is referred to and the rc;+icvz1m portion <\/p>\n
ext:ract_ecl which reads as under:\n<\/p>\n
” ‘I’ht’s takes us to the other points. Mr OJ-3. f\u00a5fCl’E’}2()’i;!TCi 5 . ‘<\/p>\n
st”r()n_qly urges that the State Gotverrtment Qj’T__t’\\\/Iys\u00a3)r”eM<\/p>\n
was not the appropriate G()l,?\u20ac_L’t’t’f1″.\u00a33t’II so r’tia,’–%e <\/p>\n
referertee. He says that C1lI1″t()ll_(],\u00a7”1 tl1e\ufb01cj?is’pt%tte.started <\/p>\n
at Bangalore. the resolt.1n’Qn_ spam-s()’r*\u20acng t.’I’tt.95.tA.c’i.i;<;1:5t.tt:\u20ac:? .
\nwas passed in Krisi'm.agt'rt. 0_ritt._A thatvh the'prr),Uer7–:es'I"ta
\nbe applied in. the Case Q\/' ir1c_i_t__L\u00a7iE1t_ta! __dts[).t1ies_i.s t:I;,\u00a7.'t"T.{3t'(3
\nthe dispute has bc'r__t_.’;*;.p()r1’s()rea”.–\u00ab._V_I.f:_sc{er7Is ta  that
\non the __\/’acts Qf this \ufb02?1_’at}’ tjhere was a
\nsepara.t.e est 4a’b1ist1n’1e’r”1t’ Vatht-3ct’i’tgj:c:.lQre. ” Mat’talt’ng am
\nwas tt:ot’kif_r’tg  t T there ‘a”‘rt’tu’nber Q\/’ other
\nLt.vor!cn1e}1 l.L}L”L’3″I’.’l>.C’lV’.fV:I’g””-Iii?! “”vT:I’f’1’e order Q1″ trans\/’er.
\nit” is t.rt._te_.1Aa\ufb01\ufb01as..t1tade\u00ab.tri'<.}\u00a7risijt:1agirf at the head Q[j't'ce.
\nbut re ara'er   on a tt'-()I"kl'"RCU"I u..~c)rkt'rt_q in
\nI3ar1.gatki;\u00abre, .1'rt \u00ab")t.1At.'vI;'l["\u00e9,'..,f"~i'.! the High Court was right. in
\nf't_\u00a7:tI)'l'vC1t".7.7\u00a7;' tjhat .tijte praper questt'.On. to raise is: where did.
\n Eaisgiitttie arise"? Orciir1ariiy. If there is a separate
\n e:;_t. and the workman is tu\u00bb:.n'!a'rtg in that
\n\u00ab. 'esta'?3it;s'f1.r7tertVt. the disputje would arise at. that place.
\n"As ti._a_"'te '."1;t\u00a7;}I Court observed. there should clearly be
\nsorne 3r1eXus between the dt'.sp1.tte and the territ.or_t; Q\/'
\n tt':re State and. not necessarily between the territory of<\/p>\n
 t.f't.e State and the t'.rrcIttst'ry eon.c:erm'r'tg u.:ht'c:.-it the<\/p>\n
ciispttte arose. " V<\/p>\n
8. By C2u’et’t.il reading of the 2.tf’0resai(i pa1r21gi’apl’1
\nof the cie(~.isi01’1 of the Hoifble Supreme Court mndared<\/p>\n
in SR1 RANGAVILAS MOTORS PVT I.fl’D.. (12130. V\\\/(:’V.].-‘.~_(‘)ld<\/p>\n
that the legal printiplt-3 laid down by the S1.ipi*eiii\u00e9:<\/p>\n
in the said ciecision is applicable to the fact: S4]..l”L\u00a3E;1l;.17(.)xf1’.()ir.lll_f<\/p>\n
the present: crase- Keeping in Vi\u20ac”\\RI:.;(_.;’AlA’\u00e9’i>i’1:k:.\u00a7(V”‘ {-ii) of,Ri.\u00ab=_l\u00a3-i 65$) <\/p>\n
the fact’ that part. cause of ac’ti0i’1_ l121s’v_’v_a”rivse11at l’<\/p>\n
B.’:1I1g’c’1l()I”(-3 is an undisputed l;2″i’fjl.’.’\u00bbTl1E? t3rd(ar_’of “i;r2111st”er
\nwas passed by the Chg1i.a;mai1  l\\lew b\u00e9ilii and
\nserved upon the pet:iti0nez” g1t,..Bahg.~2zlV(5i’-\u00e9_;.  .”.-1″lieref01’e. by<\/p>\n
1<\/span><\/p>\n
careful:”i9\u20ac4\u00e91cii:il;; 0i\u00a7 VI?,ti’i~\u20ac-1V.”‘ b{i]_;”””CflaL1ses (i) 81 {ii}. the
\npt2t.itic)1’1c:’r. had that’:_1=ig’i’1t__l”t:\u00bbQ,.-preserit. the petit.ion either<\/p>\n
beforg.Alle1l1l\u00e9\u00a3bgid~ B.’rer Bench.<\/p>\n
l”‘l511c:”*af)t.i.(5.1’1 “i3 left. tVi5″‘t’ll1e pet.iti0ncr. He had (_?l1()S\u20acl’1 to<\/p>\n
1;-3.:*\u00e9r.fe1* p\u00e9t’.i_tvij<.~)ri 1'eqL1est.iI1g the Bangalore Bench to<\/p>\n
<:xam__i11e_.~t}'1\u20ac:f.: trorrmtness of the order of t'.1*ai1s'fer and<\/p>\n
 Vi"i?_A\u00a7f:?7(Tl\u00a7()l},.L3f his rep1*esentat.ion.<\/p>\n
\\tt\/<\/p>\n
9. For the aforesaid 1’e21s()1’1s. we hold that” the
\nfiI}di3l\u00a7_{ e11″:d 1’\u20ac=aso1’1s 1’C'(.’.(}l’C1C\u20ac1 by the CAT f3211′:g_21l()rc\u00e9<\/p>\n
B61161′) in rctur11i1’1g.>; the (‘)1’ig_\u00a7i11al appli(3atio11..”c).If”\u00ab.thg><\/p>\n
petitioner 1.0 emibie him to prese1′:t’ it bc>fc11’c-\u00a7”{—-he_ *<\/p>\n
forum is not only erroneous. but ._a;11so” e1*Vf():–‘Tgi1i’ .I_:21vv’:._V<\/p>\n
“I’}”2e1’c.fore. the same  c1L1as11crciKby’._\u00e91llow’i1jg…t}1c\u00e9’v_};v.1ji’tT–.<\/p>\n
petition. Rule issued and n1a.(,i ‘e..;1bs(‘)ViL,::.e. .u’1″}.”;c\u00a7”~:ii\u00e9m\u00e9r
\nremitted to the CAT. lo\u00e9-3e1r1ga11.o’1*c–.  Bei’1r:h Wi.'{Eh’*.’:1wi’}).1_. of izhis order.<\/p>\n
H ”   VAkc:_\/’:31′:1Vs”<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court Sri L Venkatesh Nayaka,S\/O Laxma … vs Union Of India on 25 January, 2010 Author: V.Gopalagowda And A.S.Bopanna IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE DATED “1”HISTI~1E 25′?” DAY 0? JANUARY 201 PRESENT THE HONBE.-E MR. JUSTICE V GOPAI;AC4{C}W'[‘\u00a7tA_r*<,4A**:\u00ab'._\u00abNo: 14:3. 8"" BLOCK CPWD % QUA'_'_m_'1\u00ab:~;2's DOiV{_LURU. " V T . BA.NG'ALC3RI3v […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[8,20],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-66475","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-karnataka-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nSri L Venkatesh Nayaka,S\/O Laxma ... vs Union Of India on 25 January, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-l-venkatesh-nayakaso-laxma-vs-union-of-india-on-25-january-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Sri L Venkatesh Nayaka,S\/O Laxma ... vs Union Of India on 25 January, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-l-venkatesh-nayakaso-laxma-vs-union-of-india-on-25-january-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2010-01-24T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2017-06-23T04:21:11+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"13 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sri-l-venkatesh-nayakaso-laxma-vs-union-of-india-on-25-january-2010#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sri-l-venkatesh-nayakaso-laxma-vs-union-of-india-on-25-january-2010\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Sri L Venkatesh Nayaka,S\\\/O Laxma … vs Union Of India on 25 January, 2010\",\"datePublished\":\"2010-01-24T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-06-23T04:21:11+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sri-l-venkatesh-nayakaso-laxma-vs-union-of-india-on-25-january-2010\"},\"wordCount\":2379,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Karnataka High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sri-l-venkatesh-nayakaso-laxma-vs-union-of-india-on-25-january-2010#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sri-l-venkatesh-nayakaso-laxma-vs-union-of-india-on-25-january-2010\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sri-l-venkatesh-nayakaso-laxma-vs-union-of-india-on-25-january-2010\",\"name\":\"Sri L Venkatesh Nayaka,S\\\/O Laxma ... vs Union Of India on 25 January, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2010-01-24T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-06-23T04:21:11+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sri-l-venkatesh-nayakaso-laxma-vs-union-of-india-on-25-january-2010#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sri-l-venkatesh-nayakaso-laxma-vs-union-of-india-on-25-january-2010\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sri-l-venkatesh-nayakaso-laxma-vs-union-of-india-on-25-january-2010#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Sri L Venkatesh Nayaka,S\\\/O Laxma … vs Union Of India on 25 January, 2010\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Sri L Venkatesh Nayaka,S\/O Laxma ... vs Union Of India on 25 January, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-l-venkatesh-nayakaso-laxma-vs-union-of-india-on-25-january-2010","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Sri L Venkatesh Nayaka,S\/O Laxma ... vs Union Of India on 25 January, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-l-venkatesh-nayakaso-laxma-vs-union-of-india-on-25-january-2010","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2010-01-24T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2017-06-23T04:21:11+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"13 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-l-venkatesh-nayakaso-laxma-vs-union-of-india-on-25-january-2010#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-l-venkatesh-nayakaso-laxma-vs-union-of-india-on-25-january-2010"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Sri L Venkatesh Nayaka,S\/O Laxma … vs Union Of India on 25 January, 2010","datePublished":"2010-01-24T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-06-23T04:21:11+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-l-venkatesh-nayakaso-laxma-vs-union-of-india-on-25-january-2010"},"wordCount":2379,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Karnataka High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-l-venkatesh-nayakaso-laxma-vs-union-of-india-on-25-january-2010#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-l-venkatesh-nayakaso-laxma-vs-union-of-india-on-25-january-2010","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-l-venkatesh-nayakaso-laxma-vs-union-of-india-on-25-january-2010","name":"Sri L Venkatesh Nayaka,S\/O Laxma ... vs Union Of India on 25 January, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2010-01-24T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-06-23T04:21:11+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-l-venkatesh-nayakaso-laxma-vs-union-of-india-on-25-january-2010#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-l-venkatesh-nayakaso-laxma-vs-union-of-india-on-25-january-2010"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-l-venkatesh-nayakaso-laxma-vs-union-of-india-on-25-january-2010#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Sri L Venkatesh Nayaka,S\/O Laxma … vs Union Of India on 25 January, 2010"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/66475","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=66475"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/66475\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=66475"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=66475"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=66475"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}