(1.) Frivolously prolonged spate of litigation leaving a successful party waiting for reaping fruits of litigation, in ultimate analysis, erodes the faith in the justice delivery system. The facts of this case make one such instance.
(2.) The appellant-original respondent No.1 has preferred this appeal under Sec. 4 of the Karnataka High Court Act, 1961, seeking to call in question judgment and order dtd. 18/1/2024 of learned Single Judge. Thereby, learned Single Judge allowed the writ petition of the original petitioner-the MICO Associates Housing Cooperative Society Ltd.-respondent No.2 herein, by setting aside order dtd. 24/8/2013 passed by the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal, Bengaluru in Cooperative Appeal No.89 of 2023. 2.1 Consequently, Interim Application No.4 and an Interim Application No.7 filed in the said appeal proceedings came to be allowed. Appeal No.89 of 2023 preferred by respondent No.1-Sri. G.Krishna Murthy, before the Tribunal came to be dismissed as not maintainable. I.A. No.4 was for vacating the interim order and I.A. No.7 was seeking dismissal of the appeal on the ground of maintainability.
(3.) The facts in the background have chequered history, which may be delineated in some detail in order to comprehend the ultimate controversy involved in this appeal. Respondent No.2 herein-MICO Associates Housing Society (hereinafter referred to as 'the Society') a cooperative society registered under the Karnataka Cooperative Societies Act, comprised of workers of the MICO Factory, was formed with an object of buying land and forming a layout to distribute the sites for providing roof to the factory workers, who were more than 1200 in numbers. The society entered into a Land Assembling- cum-Development Agreement dtd. 15/3/2013 with the appellant-original respondent No.1, who happened to be the Proprietor of one Vinayaka Builders and Developers. The appellant promised to procure lands from different land owners. In the process, respondent-appellant herein collected more than Rs.31.75 crores.