- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:26524 WP No. 15324 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF JULY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA WRIT PETITION NO. 15324 OF 2025 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: 1. M/S. SPRING BOREWELLS CO. PVT. LTD., (COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT, 1956) HAVING OFFICE AT NO.41, CUBBON ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 001 REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR SRI. K.L.SWAMY. 2. L.K.TRUST, HAVING ITS OFFICE AT NO. 101, INFANTRY ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 001, REPRESENTED BY ITS TRUSTEE SRI. K.L.SWAMY UNDER TRUST ACT. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI ABHINAV R, ADVOCATE) AND: M/S. KANYAKUMARI BUILDERS PVT. LIMITED, A COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF THE COMPANIES ACT, 1956, HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT “RAHEJA CHAMBERS”, LINKING ROAD, AND MAIN AVENUE SANTACRUZ (W) MUMBAI Digitally signed by NAGAVENI Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:26524 WP No. 15324 of 2025 REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR MR. ADITHYA RAHEJA. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI AJESH KUMAR S., ADVOCATE) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH ANNEXURE-A NAMELY THE ORDER DATED 03.05.2025 PASSED BY LEARNED LXXXVII ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE AT BANGALORE, COMMERCIAL COURT (CCH-88) AT BANGALORE IN COM. EX.NO. 1223/2017 DIRECTING THE OFFICE TO RELEASE RS.17.5 CRORE IN FAVOUR OF RESPONDENT HEREIN ON THE INTERLOCUTORY APPLICATION NO.5 FILED UNDER SECTION 36 OF ARBITRATION AND CONCILIATION ACT 1996 R.W.ORDER XXI RULE 1 R.W.SECTION 151 OF THE CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE 1908 AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA ORAL ORDER The petitioners-judgment debtors are before this Court calling in question an order of the concerned court dated 03.05.2025 by which the office was directed to release ₹ 17.5 crores in favour of the respondent on an interlocutory application in IA No.5 filed under Section 36 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereafter referred to as the 'Act'). - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:26524 WP No. 15324 of 2025 2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the two applications were filed on the same day, one seeking withdrawal of the amount and one advancing the case. The application that was filed seeking withdrawal of the amount was not served on him, it was only the application seeking advancement of the case that was served. Therefore, he was not present at the time when the order was passed. 3. Learned counsel Sri.Ajesh Kumar S., appearing for the respondent would, however, dispute the position contending that the applications were indeed served upon the petitioners, be those submissions as they are. 4. In the light of the contention that the application was not served upon him and the absence of the petitioners on the said date, it becomes prima facie an ex parte order directing the release of the amount in favour of the decree holder. It is also a fact that is to be noticed that the petitioners- judgment debtors have suffered orders before a Fora and has partially succeeded in the Appellate Fora filed under Section 34 - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:26524 WP No. 15324 of 2025 of the Act and both the judgment debtors and the decree holder are before the Division Bench of this Court in an appeal filed under Section 37 of the Act. The issue now is with regard to an application that is allowed directing release of ₹ 17.5 crores in favour of the decree holder. 5. In the light of the aforesaid circumstance of a doubt with regard to the service of notice and the consequent absence of the petitioners, I deem it appropriate to direct the concerned Court to consider the application seeking withdrawal of the amount after hearing both the parties, in accordance with law. 6. It is needless to observe that it is open to the petitioners to file their objections to the said application. The said application after hearing both the parties shall merit consideration and its conclusion be within four weeks from the date of receipt of the copy of this order. 7. Till such time, the interim order of restraint granted by this Court shall continue. The concerned Court is at liberty to - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:26524 WP No. 15324 of 2025 pass further orders. The interim order would continue only till the disposal of the application, which is directed to be concluded within four weeks from the date of receipt of the copy of this order. 8. It is made clear that this court has not answered any claim on the merit of the matter, either of the petitioners or of the respondent. All contentions would remain open to be urged before the concerned Court. Ordered accordingly and Writ Petition is disposed. Sd/- (M.NAGAPRASANNA) JUDGE CBC List No.: 1 Sl No.: 27 CT:SS