w w w . L a w y e r S e r v i c e s . i n

The Branch Manager, The Karnataka State Financial Corporation v/s M/s. Gayathri Agro Products, Karatagi

Company & Directors' Information:- G H AGRO PRODUCTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U15143PB1996PTC018159

Company & Directors' Information:- S A AGRO PRODUCTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U01403WB2013PTC195653

Company & Directors' Information:- B. D. AGRO PRODUCTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U01400WB2009PTC136319

Company & Directors' Information:- D A P AGRO PRODUCTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U01403WB2011PTC157956

Company & Directors' Information:- B. K. AGRO PRODUCTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U70101WB1990PTC049682

Company & Directors' Information:- S V M A AGRO PRODUCTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U15142TZ2003PTC010834

Company & Directors' Information:- K E AGRO PRODUCTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U15314KL2002PTC015782

Company & Directors' Information:- AGRO (INDIA) PRODUCTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U01500DL2013PTC250521

Company & Directors' Information:- W B AGRO PRODUCTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U15400KA2014PTC073123

Company & Directors' Information:- D M AGRO PRODUCTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U74899DL1995PTC066893

Company & Directors' Information:- D N AGRO PRODUCTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U15314UR2005PTC032824

Company & Directors' Information:- N K AGRO PRODUCTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U15490PB2010PTC034534

Company & Directors' Information:- INDIA AGRO PRODUCTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U01300TZ1991PTC003161

Company & Directors' Information:- S B R AGRO PRODUCTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U01120TN2008PTC070170

Company & Directors' Information:- B S AGRO PRODUCTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U29246WB1995PTC073119

Company & Directors' Information:- S C P AGRO PRODUCTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U15400WB2010PTC154344

Company & Directors' Information:- B B AGRO PRODUCTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U01111WB1999PTC089962

Company & Directors' Information:- B. R. AGRO PRODUCTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U74999MP2020PTC052151

Company & Directors' Information:- J. M AGRO PRODUCTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U01122UP2007PTC032828

Company & Directors' Information:- P M AGRO PRODUCTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U01100MP2010PTC023037

Company & Directors' Information:- Q-MANAGER PRODUCTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U74300DL2006PTC154567

Company & Directors' Information:- M. C. AGRO PRODUCTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U74990WB2009PTC135219

Company & Directors' Information:- P G AGRO PRODUCTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U01403WB2009PTC139377

Company & Directors' Information:- L. M. AGRO PRODUCTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U15139DL2010PTC207504

Company & Directors' Information:- C K AGRO PRODUCTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U01403AP2016PTC098332

Company & Directors' Information:- R J AGRO PRODUCTS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U15311KA2005PTC036080

Company & Directors' Information:- AGRO PRODUCTS PVT LTD [Strike Off] CIN = U01131OR1983PTC001188

Company & Directors' Information:- A A J AGRO AND FINANCIAL LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U01111UP1995PLC018851

Company & Directors' Information:- R L R AGRO PRODUCTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U01403TG2012PTC082514

Company & Directors' Information:- R P V AGRO PRODUCTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U01300TZ1997PTC008071

Company & Directors' Information:- A V S AGRO-PRODUCTS COMPANY LIMITED [Dissolved] CIN = U74899DL1995PLC070790

Company & Directors' Information:- M R AGRO PRODUCTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U01400MH2012PTC226708

Company & Directors' Information:- KARATAGI AGRO PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U01403KA2013PTC067617

Company & Directors' Information:- B. U. AGRO-PRODUCTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U01100GJ2018PTC101009

    Writ Appeal No. 1546 of 2015 (GM-KSFC)

    Decided On, 21 May 2015

    At, High Court of Karnataka


    For the Appellant: Veeresh R. Budihal, Advocate. For the Respondent: V.M. Sheelvant, Advocate.

Judgment Text

(Prayer: This writ appeal is filed under S.4 of the Karnataka High Court Act, praying to set aside the order passed in the Writ Petition No. 103642/2015 dated 12.05.2015.)

1. Sri V.M.Sheelvant, learned advocate, who appears in the pending writ petition, is directed to take notice for the respondent. Copy was served on him.

2. Though this appeal is listed today for preliminary nearing, with the consent of learned Advocates on both sides, is taken up for final hearing.

3. The respondent has filed W.P.No.103642/2015 against the appellant, to quash an order dated 18.03.2015, copy of which is marked as Annexure-E and asking for a mandamus to handover possession of the assets of M/s.Kotturu Basaveshwara Industries of Kartagi. 

4. An interim prayer seeking stay of Annexure-E and to direct the respondent to handover possession of M/s. Kotturu Basaveshwara Industries of Karatagi, Gangavathi Taluk, having been sought in the writ petition and learned Single Judge having passed an interim order, directing the appellant/KSFC to handover possession of the Rice Mill, forthwith, on the ground of payment of substantial amount and the undertaking of the writ petitioner, to pay the balance amount as well, feeling aggrieved, this writ appeal was filed.

5. The brief facts of the case, sans unnecessary details are, that M/s.Kotturu Basaveshwara Industries, a partnership firm, availed loan from the KSFC and became defaulter. The collateral security i.e., the rice mill in question, was taken-over by the KSFC, in exercise of power under Section 29 of the State Financial Corporations Act, 1951. The borrower suggested that its assets and liabilities could be transferred to the respondent. The proposal was accepted by the KSFC and was communicated to the respondent, on 05.09.2014, vide Annexure-B, by subjecting the respondent to deposit Rs. 1,19,46,650/- as down payment within ten days from 15.09.2014 and the balance loan liability of Rs.2,60,00,000/- of M/s. Kotturu Basaveswara Industries, to be transferred and to be paid on deferred payment basis, commencing from 10.03.2015, along with the applicable rate of interest. The respondent having accepted the proposal, made initial payment. However, payment was not in terms of the conditions stipulated in Annexure-B. On 18.03.2015, vide Annexure-E, the proposal given vide Annexure-B, was cancelled. The said communication having been assailed in writ petition No.103642/2015, learned Single Judge has passed the impugned order.

6. The main contention raised by Sri Veeresh R.Budihal, learned advocate is that the handing-over of possession of the rice mill in question, at an interlocutory stage, creates lot of adverse consequences. He submitted that at the interlocutory stage, a relief which is asked for and is available at stage of the disposal of the matter, ought not to have been granted. It was submitted that the extraordinary order passed by the learned Single Judge, impugned herein, being opposed to the record of the case and the settled principles of law, is liable to be set aside.

7. Sri V.M.Sheelvant, learned advocate, on the other hand submitted that substantial amount of Rs.1,19,46,650/- having been remitted to the KSFC and the respondent having undertaken to pay the balance amount of Rs.2,00,000/- as well, learned Single Judge is justified in passing the impugned order. He submitted that the learned Single Judge having exercised the discretion, no interference with the impugned order is called for.

8. Perused the Writ Petition No.103642/2015. Main prayer, at Column (b), being relevant, is extracted herein below for ready reference:

"b) Issue a writ in the nature of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction directing the respondents to handover the possession of the assets of M/s.Kottur Basaveshwara Industries of Karatagi to petitioner forthwith in the interest of justice and equity". 

9. Considered the rival contentions and perused the record. Point for consideration is, whether an interim order which has the effect of a final order, can be passed at an interlocutory stage of the case?

10. With due respect, in our considered opinion, the approach of the learned Single Judge is judicially unsound and is indefensible. The final relief sought in the writ petition, extracted supra, has been granted as interim relief. Whether the writ petitioner is entitled to any relief has to be adjudicated at the time of final disposal of the writ petition. It is a settled proposition of law that final relief asked for should not be granted at an interlocutory stage. Apex Court has taken exception to the practice of granting an interim order, which practically would amount to giving principal relief sought in a case. Herein, learned Single Judge has not assigned any reason in support of the extraordinary order passed. In view of the well settled position of law, that by an interim order the final relief should not be granted, as has been erroneously

Please Login To View The Full Judgment!

done in the instant case, we have no other option than to allow this appeal. (Also see DAYANAND VEDIC VIDYALAYA SANCHALAK SAMITI VS. EDUCATION INSPECTOR, GREATER BOMBAY AND ANOTHER, (2007) 15 SCC 192). In the result, writ appeal is allowed and the impugned order is set aside. Since, the controversy between the parties lies within a narrow compass, we request the learned roster Judge to take up the writ petition on 15.06.2015 and decide the same with expedition. The Registry is directed to send the record, forthwith to Dharwad Bench.