K.Rajavarma Ballal. Vs. arnataka State Tpt. Appellate Tribunal & Ors. Secretary, Reg. Tpt. Authority & A
EmailAppeal: Special Leave Petition (Civil) Nos.505/87
With
SLP (Civil) No.2449/1987.
(From the Judgment and Order dated 16.9.1986/12.11.1986 of the High Court of Karnataka in W.A. No.2406/86 & W.A.No.2897/86)
With
SLP (Civil) No.2449/1987.
(From the Judgment and Order dated 16.9.1986/12.11.1986 of the High Court of Karnataka in W.A. No.2406/86 & W.A.No.2897/86)
Petitioner: K.Rajavarma Ballal.
Respondent: arnataka State Tpt. Appellate Tribunal & Ors.
Secretary, Reg. Tpt. Authority & Anr.
Secretary, Reg. Tpt. Authority & Anr.
Apeal: Special Leave Petition (Civil) Nos.505/87
With
SLP (Civil) No.2449/1987.
(From the Judgment and Order dated 16.9.1986/12.11.1986 of the High Court of Karnataka in W.A. No.2406/86 & W.A.No.2897/86)
With
SLP (Civil) No.2449/1987.
(From the Judgment and Order dated 16.9.1986/12.11.1986 of the High Court of Karnataka in W.A. No.2406/86 & W.A.No.2897/86)
Judges: E.S.VENKATARAMIAH & M.M.DUTT, JJ.
Date of Judgment: Mar 09, 1987
Appearances:
Mr. C.S.Vaidyanathan, Mr. S.R.Bhat and Mr. S.R.Setia, Advocates for the Petitioner.
Mr. M.Rangaswamy, Mr. N.D.B.Raju and Mr. Y.P.Rao, Advocates for the Respondents.
Head Note:
CONSTITUTION OF INDIA:
Art.136 – Validity of the Award pending before the Civil Judge – Not a fit case for interference under Art.136 – Parties may approach the Civil Court for any interim order for protecting their interest.
JUDGEMENT:
ORDER
1. We are informed that there is a dispute with regard to the validity of the Award Pending before the Civil Judge, Mangalore. We, therefore, do not consider that these two cases are fit cases for interference under Article 136 of the Constitution. It is open to any of the parties to approach the Civil Court for any interim order protecting the interest of party. The orders under challenge are ultimately subject to the decision in the Arbitration case. The Civil Court is directed to dispose of the arbitration proceedings expeditiously. With these observations, special leave petitions are dismissed.
1. We are informed that there is a dispute with regard to the validity of the Award Pending before the Civil Judge, Mangalore. We, therefore, do not consider that these two cases are fit cases for interference under Article 136 of the Constitution. It is open to any of the parties to approach the Civil Court for any interim order protecting the interest of party. The orders under challenge are ultimately subject to the decision in the Arbitration case. The Civil Court is directed to dispose of the arbitration proceedings expeditiously. With these observations, special leave petitions are dismissed.
