Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
S SUNIL DUTT YADAV, J
M/S DIVYA CONSTRUCTIONS – Appellant
Versus
THE SPECIAL TAHSILDAR – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner challenges attachment notice regarding properties. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. court finds notice unenforceable against distinct legal entity. (Para 3 , 4) |
ORAL ORDER
2. It is the case of the petitioner that the properties sought to be attached belong to the petitioner and have nothing to do with the liability of the complainant in RERA proceedings in Complaint No.CMP/180919/ 0001293. It is submitted that the said proceedings are against Divya Infra Properties Pvt. Ltd. and cannot be enforced against the petitioner which is a different entity.
"It is the case of the petitioner that it is a registered partnership firm. Copy of the deed is produced at Annexure-B. The attachment notice at Annexure-A has been issued by the Special Tahsildar seeking to execute the order passed by the RERA court in Case No.626/2018-19. It is submitted that the said proceedings under the RERA Act are against Divya Infra Properties Pvt. Ltd. and the order passed against such entity cannot be enforced against the petitioner which is a different legal entity. It is further contended that even if some of the partners of the petitioner - Firm are Directors of Divya Infra Properties Pvt. Ltd., the
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
