Writ petition filed to quash auction details in a bankers' case was dismissed as the petitioner failed to appear on the day of hearing.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 04TH DAY OF APRIL, 2022
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT
WRIT PETITION NO.381 OF 2021 (GM-RES)
BETWEEN :
C.M.MUPASIL @ SADDAM, S/O C.M.IBRAHIM SAB, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, R/AT NO.38, EKINSA COLONY, T.K.ROAD, BHADRAVATHI, SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT – 577 301. ...PETITIONER
(BY SRI H.MALLAN GOUD, ADVOCATE)
AND :
UNION BANK OF INDIA B.H.ROAD, BHADRAVATHI BRANCH, BHADRAVATHI – 577 301 REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORISED OFFICER. …RESPONDENT
THIS WRIT PETITION FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH ANNEXURE-G TO E-SALE NOTICE DATED 01.01.2021 ISSUED BY RESPONDENT SHOWING THE DATE OF AUCTION AS 18.01.2021, ETC.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
2
ORDER
This Court on 16.01.2021 had ordered issuance of
notice to respondents granting stay of E-Sale Notice dated 01.01.2021, subject to petitioner depositing Rs.25,00,000/(Rupees Twenty Five Lakhs only) on 18.01.2021 with the Respondent-Bank. It had also directed that the petitioner shall file an affidavit undertaking to pay the aforementioned sum. But the petitioner has neither taken any steps for service of notice on Respondent-Bank nor has filed an affidavit undertaking as directed. The petitioner was subsequently granted time to take steps on 16.06.2021 as well as on 30.03.2022.
Sd/JUDGE
DH
C.M. Mupasil @ Saddam
Union Bank of India
S.G. Pandit
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
