2024 Supreme(Online)(Kar) 36784
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
MR. JUSTICE M. NAGAPRASANNA, J
MR. HEMACHANDRA M.KUPPALLI – Appellant
Versus
M/S R.B.GREEN FIELD AGRO INFRA PVT LTD. – Respondent
WRIT PETITION No.12169 OF 2023 (GM-RES)
For the Appellants/Petitioners:SRI P.P.HEDGE, SENIOR ADVOCATE, SMT. SHARADI S.SHETTY
For the Respondents: SMT. K.P.YASHODHA, HCGP
The court ruled that a breached settlement from a Lok Adalat can lead to the restoration of original convictions and ordered the revival of earlier proceedings.
Headnote:(A) Constitution of India - Articles 226 and 227 - Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 - Section 138 - Petition for expediting execution of a decree regarding cheque dishonor - The petitioner sought a writ for the expeditious disposal of Execution Case No. 640 of 2017 and restoration of conviction order dated 26-08-2015 against the respondent due to non-compliance of a Lok Adalat's award. The primary issue involved the enforcement of the terms of a settlement made before the Lok Adalat and the failure of the accused to honor those terms. The court observed that a settlement, once breached, could lead to restoration of the original conviction. Therefore, the court set aside the award of the Lok Adalat, restoring the proceedings before the City Civil and Sessions Judge. (Paras 1-16)
(B) Mandamus - The court is empowered to direct the execution of orders and restoration of proceedings when a party attempts to evade legal responsibilities. (Paras 10-15)
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. details of cheque issuance and dishonor. (Para 2 , 3) |
| 2. execution case initiation and respondent evasion. (Para 4 , 9) |
| 3. arguments regarding settlement and its implications. (Para 5 , 7 , 10) |
| 4. guidelines for compounding offences under section 138. (Para 11 , 12) |
| 5. fraudulent settlement impacts legal outcomes. (Para 15) |
| 6. order restoration of appeal proceedings. (Para 16) |
ORDER
The petitioner is before this Court seeking a direction by issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus for expeditious disposal of Execution Case No.640 of 2017 pending before the City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru and has also sought further slew of prayers including restoration of the order of conviction and sentence dated 26-08-2015 passed against the respondent No.1/accused No.2 in C.C.No.15698 of 2014 by the XXI Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru.
2. Facts adumbrated are as follows:-
The petitioner is the complainant and respondent No.1 is accused No.2. The 1st respondent is the firm represented by its proprietor the 2nd respondent. For the sake of convenience both these respondents would be referred to as ‘respondent’ in this order. Both the petitioner and the respondent have a transaction and the transaction leads to issuance of a cheque by the respondent in favour of the petitioner for an amount of `49/- lakhs drawn on Axis Bank Limited. The cheque when presented for realization was dishonoured for want of sufficient funds on 21-01-2014. The petitioner takes up legal proceedings against the respondent/accused before the learned Magistrate invoking Section 200 of the Cr.P.C., for offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (‘the Act’ for short). The learned Magistrate by order dated 26-08-2015 convicts the respondent in C.C.No.15698 of 2014 holding him to be guilty of the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Act and sentences him to pay a fine of `29,10,000/- and in default to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of ten months. It was further ordered that a sum of `29,00,000/- was to be paid to the complainant by way of compensation under Section 357 of the Cr.P.C., out of the fine amount.
3. The respondent immediately prefers an appeal before the Principal City Civil and Sessions Judge at Bengaluru invoking the provisions under Section 374 of the Cr.P.C., in Criminal Appeal No.1216 of 2015. During the pendency of the appeal, the Court refers the matter to the Lok Adalat for settlement of dispute between the petitioner and the respondent on 05-05-2016. The matter gets settled before the Lok Adalat on that day and an award is drawn up by the Lok Adalat whereby the accused undertook to pay sum of `29,00,000/- in installments, failing which the petitioner was at liberty to recover `30,00,000/- with 12% interest from the date of the award. The accused fails to make any payment or fails to adhere to the conditions of settlement. The petitioner then files an execution petition before the concerned Court in Execution Case No.640 of 2017 on 03-03-2017 and the present writ petition is preferred on 07-06-2023, 6 years after filing of the execution case alleging that there is no progress in the execution case. Therefore, a direction to the concerned Court to expedite the execution case and secure the presence of the respondents 1 and 2 is sought. The matter was heard, reserved and posted for its pronouncement on 18-11-2023, at which point in time, it was noticed that the 2nd respondent though had been absconding, effort to serve him was not directed to be made. Therefore, this Court on 18-11-2023 had passed the following order:
“The matter was heard, reserved and is also listed for pronouncement of order today. Notice was not issued to the accused in C.C.15698 of 2014. Though, the accused has been evading the process of law for the last 6 years and no NBWs issued against him by the concerned Court are executed, as every attempt of execution has been returned as addressee le