Partly allowed

Karnataka Gramin Bank v. Hanumanthappa

DRT13 Jul 2023OA/724/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Tribunal granted an ex parte ad interim injunction restraining the defendants from alienating, transferring, or creating third-party interests in the mortgaged Schedule 'B' property during the pendency of the original application for recovery of dues.

What did the court decide?

Referred to as I.A. No.198/2023 - The Defendants were restrained from dealing with, disposing of, selling, or creating third-party rights in the mortgaged Schedule 'B' property.

Karnataka Gramin Bank versus Hanumanthappa — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2023)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-I, KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶2

Dated this the 13th day of luly 2023

¶3

Present: Sri IMTIAZ ALI

Presiding officer

r.A.No.198/2023

O,A, No,724/2,J23

BETWEEN:

Karnataka Gramin Bank, Head office:

Bellary

Branch:

V.V. Pura,

Hiriyur Taluk, Chitradurga District Represented by its Branch Manager, Mr Munna Srishailam

¶14

.. PETITIONER/ APPLICANT BANK

¶15

AND:

¶16

Mr Hanumanthappa, S/o Sri Junjappa, Residing at Gownhalli Village, Hiriyur Taluk, Chitradurga District

¶17

Mr C. Ravi, S/o Sri Siriyappa, Residing at Gownhalli Village, Hiriyur Taluk, Chitradurga District

¶18

.. RESPONDENTS/ DEFENDANTS

¶19

EX PARTE AD INTERIM ORDER ON IA No.19A/2O23

¶20

1. The present OA is filed by the Applicant Bank against the Defendants for issuance of recovery certificate and other

¶21

LA.No.198/2023 in O.A.No.724l2023

¶22

reliefs for recovery of a sum of Rs.22,27,L02.42 together^with further applicable rates of interest thereon, costs, charges^etc.

¶23

The above Interlocutory Application is filed by the Applicant Bank with affidavit of its Branch Manager, Mr Munna Srishailam, seeking to^grant an interim order of injunction, restraining the Defendants, from transferring, alienating, disposing, encumbering or dealing with the mortgaged schedule property till the outstanding dues of the Applicant Bank are cleared by the Defendants, in the interest of^justice and equity. In the affidavit, inter alia, it is submitted that the Applicant Bank is having apprehension that during the pendency of the Original Application, the 1't Defendant might alienate the mortgaged schedule^propefty and create thirdparty interest on it in order to defeat the claim of the Applicant Bank. Hence, the Applicant Bank has sought to allow the I.A.No.198/2023 as^prayed for pending final adjudication of the Original Application.

¶24

It appears that the Petitioner/Applicant Bank has filed the above I.A. on the^premise that Defendants may alienate or dispose of in any way creating third-party interest on the mortgaged Schedule 'B' property morefully described in the schedule to the above I.A. Considering the huge amount of O.A. involved in this case, and balance of convenience, the

¶25

¶26

1.A.No.198/2023 in O.A.No.724/2023

¶27

present IA is to be allowed by keeping open the merits of the case and without prejudice to the rights of both the parties. By doing so, no prejudice, no harm and no loss will be caused to the Defendants. As the Applicant Bank has prima facie established the essential ingredients for granting ex parte ad interim order of injunction, I proceed to pass following:

¶28

ORDER

¶29

Defendants, their agents, representatives, assigns, etc., or any other person/s claiming under them are hereby restrained from dealing with, disposing of, selling, transferring, alienating, encumbering, parting with possession, creating third-party right(s), title, interest and claim of any nature whatsoever in any manner in respect of the mortgaged Schedule 'B' property, during the pendency of the OA.

¶30

Issue summons and notices on I.A. to Defendants/Respondents by RPAD. Liberty is granted to Defendants to apply before this Tribunal for modification, variation or cancellation of this order.

¶31

1.A.No.198/2023 in O.A.No.72412023

¶32

SCHEDULE'B, PROPERTY

¶33

(Owned by Mr HanumanthaPPa)

¶34

Land bearing Survey No.B3 (measuring 10 acres & 00 guntas), situated at Gownhally Village, Aimangala Hobli, Hiriyur Taluk, Chitradurga District, Karnataka State, and bounded as follows:

¶35

East by : Land of Ningamma, West by : Road, Nofth by : Land of Thimmanna, South by : Land of Ningamma

¶36

For compliance / steps / further^proceedings before

¶37

Registrar call on 05.10.2023.

¶38

{rashi}

¶39

\ - ^.1h Y rt'r (rMrrA2 ALr) PRESIDING OFFICER DRT-r' BENGALURU

Karnataka Gramin Bank v. Hanumanthappa

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Karnataka Gramin Bank v. Hanumanthappa

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Bishnu Priya Panda versus Ujjivan Small Finance Bank Limited

State Bank of India versus M/s Mahfuz Construction and Others

Hdfc Bank versus M/s Jaiswal Enterprises and Others

Shafi Adattil versus Can Fin Homes Ltd.

Idbi Bank versus M/s Maa Vindhyavashini Industries and others

Uco Bank versus M/s V1 Veriety Mall and Others