Allowed

M/S Ishankar Hospitality v. the Authorised Officer

Karnataka HC20 Dec 2021WP/16682/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition challenging a possession notice, the Karnataka High Court granted the petitioner, a debtor, a further extension until 20.01.2022 to deposit remaining installments. The extension was conditioned on the petitioner's agreement to vacate the property and return possession to the bank if payment fails.

What did the court decide?

Granted extension of time till 20.01.2022 for deposit of installments, subject to petitioner's commitment to vacate premises upon failure to pay.

M/S Ishankar Hospitality Vs the Authorised Officer — Banking and Recovery | Karnataka HC (2021)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 20^TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2021

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE KRISHNA S.DIXIT

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO.16682 OF 2021 (GM-RES)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

M/S. ISHANKAR HOSPITALITY, A REGISTERED PARTNERSHIP FIRM, HAVING ITS PLACE OF BUSINESS AT WARD NO.26, SITE NO.21, SY. NO. 30/6, WITH MK NO.3189 AND MK NO.3462/8141/8034, SAGAR ROAD, NH-206, SHIVAMOGGA - 577 204.

¶9

REPRESENTED BY ITS PARTNER,

¶10

DR. T.S. HEMANTH, S/O T.V. SHIVASHANKARAPPA, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, RESIDING AT "HEMAKUNJA", BASAVESHWARA STREET, TARIKERE, CHIKMAGALUR DISTRICT - 577 228.

¶11

…PETITIONER

¶12

(BY SRI. H. KANTHARAJ, SR. COUNSEL A/W SRI. RAVI H.K., ADVOCATE)

¶13

AND:

¶14

THE AUTHORISED OFFICER, TUMKUR GRAIN MERCHANTS CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD., HAVING ITS ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE AT B.H. ROAD, TUMKUR - 572 102.

¶15

…RESPONDENT

¶16

(BY SRI. K.V. LOKESH, ADVOCATE)

¶17

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE POSSESSION NOTICE DTD. 20.10.2020 ISSUED BY THE

¶18

¶19

RESPONDENT VIDE ANNX-N BY ISSUING A WRIT OF CERTIORARI AND DECLARE THAT THE SEALING DOWN OF THE SCHEDULED PROPERTY BY THE RESPONDENT BANK IS ILLEGAL.

¶20

THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶21

ORDER

¶22

This Court vide interim order dated 14.09.2021 had granted some reprieve to the petitioner-debtor subject to condition that he would deposit a certain amount by three equalized installments each comprising Rupees One Crore. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that already the first installment has been paid and this is not disputed by the learned Senior Panel Counsel appearing for the respondentBank.

¶23

Learned Senior Advocate Mr. H.Kantharaj appearing

¶24

for the petitioner pleads about some financial difficulty being faced by the petitioner and therefore, as a last chance one more extension be granted; although this is vehemently opposed by the learned panel counsel for the Bank, this Court sees some justification for granting such extension, the bonafide already having been shown by the petitioner by making payment of first installment; heavens would not fall

¶25

¶26

down if an extension of short period is granted; added, during

¶27

the extension period the interest as agreed would accrue.

¶28

There is yet another reason for granting the

¶29

reprieve as sought for; the learned Senior Advocate appearing

¶30

for the petitioner on instruction fairly submits that if petitioner fails to pay the two installments as undertaken now (the conversation between the Court and the petitioner's counsel is recorded in the system) his client would at once quit the premises and peaceably deliver the possession thereof to the respondent Bank; he also agrees that if the petitioner fails to do it, the bank can invoke the help of jurisdictional police for removing him with force and that police at the sight of this judgment shall extend their help for this purpose.

¶31

In the above circumstances, writ petition is disposed off

¶32

granting the petitioner further extension of period till 20.01.2022, subject to what has been observed above.

¶33

Sd/JUDGE

¶34

M/S Ishankar Hospitality v. the Authorised Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S Ishankar Hospitality v. the Authorised Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sri. Ramachandra Nayaka Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri. Abdul Khuddus Vs Karnataka State Board of Wakfs

K B Lingaraju Vs the Deputy Registrar

Miss Anuradha Baliga Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri S P Narayanaswamy Vs the State of Karnataka

M/S Nischal Enterprises Vs the State of Karnataka