Dismissed

Shri Narayan S/O Ramakrishna Kulkarni v. the Cheif Manager

Karnataka HC23 Nov 2023WP/103387/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petition sought writ mandamus directing Bank to auction other mortgaged properties before the residence to repay dues. Court held petitioners have no right to demand residence exclusion but directed humanitarian consideration to sell other properties first. Writ dismissed.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition dismissed; Bank directed to consider humanitarian approach and sell other properties before applicant's residence.

Shri Narayan S/O Ramakrishna Kulkarni Vs the Cheif… — Banking and Recovery | Karnataka HC (2023)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2023:KHC-D:13697 WP No. 103387 of 2023

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH

¶4

DATED THIS THE 23^RD DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2023

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.I.ARUN

¶7

WRIT PETITION NO. 103387 OF 2023 (GM-RES)

¶8

BETWEEN:

¶9

SHRI NARAYAN S/O. RAMAKRISHNA KULKARNI, AGE: 54 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS, R/O: SHRI LAKSHMI NIVAS, 8^TH CROSS, VIDYAGIRI, BAGALKOT, NOW RESIDING AT PLOT NO.63 AND 64, RS NO.117, ROOPLAND, VIDYAGIRI, BAGALKOT-587 102.

¶10

…PETITIONER

¶11

(BY SRI SHIVARAJ S. BALLOLI, ADVOCATE)

¶12

AND:

¶13

GIRIJA A BYAHATTI

¶14

Digitally signed by GIRIJA A BYAHATTI

¶15

THE CHEIF MANAGER, CANARA BANK, MAIN BRANCH, BAGALKOT, TQ: BAGALKOT, DIST: BAGALKOT-583 101.

¶16

CANARA BANK, RECOVERY MANAGEMENT BRANCH, CENTRUM BUILDING, GOKUL ROAD, HUBBALLI, TQ: HUBBALLI, DIST: DHARWAD-580 020, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF MANAGER/AUTHORIZED OFFICER.

¶17

CANARA BANK, HEAD OFFICE, 6648, 112, JC RD, P.B., HALSURPETE, NAGARATHPETE, BENGALURU-560001, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR.

¶18

¶19

NC: 2023:KHC-D:13697 WP No. 103387 of 2023

¶20

…RESPONDENTS

¶21

(BY SRI MALLIKARJUNSWAMY B. HIREMATH, ADV. FOR R2; NOTICE TO R1 & R3 ARE SERVED)

¶22

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OF MANDAMUS DIRECTING THE RESPONDENTS TO CONSIDER THE REPRESENTATION DATED 26/05/2023 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE RESPONDENT NO.2 VIDE ANNEXURE-E; ISSUE A WRIT OF MANDAMUS DIRECTING THE RESPONDENTS TO NOT TO IMPLEMENT THE COMMISSIONER NOTICE DATED 01/02/2023 IN SO FAR AS IT IS CONCERNED TO THE RESIDENTIAL DWELLING HOUSE OF THE PETITIONER MENTIONED AT SL.NO.12 (PROPERTY 12) IN THE SCHEDULE PROPERTY MENTIONED IN THE COURT COMMISSIONER NOTICE DATED 01/02/2023 VIDE ANNEXURE-

¶23

D UNTIL THE RESPONDENTS AUCTION ALL THE OTHER PROPERTIES MENTIONED IN THE COURT COMMISSIONER NOTICE.

¶24

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶25

3 - NC: 2023:KHC-D:13697 WP No. 103387 of 2023

¶26

ORDER

¶27

The petitioner has borrowed loan from respondent – Bank. As a security amount, 12 properties are mortgaged which includes a residential house situated at plot Nos.63 and 64 in Sy. No.117, Roopland, Vidyagiri, Bagalakote. Petitioner committed default in repayment of the loan. Respondents initiated proceedings under Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act. In the process, they have attached the properties mortgaged and has brought them to sale. Aggrieved by the same, the present writ petition is filed.

¶28

The case of the petitioner is that he is trying to arrange for alternative finance to repay the dues of the bank and he has requested the bank authorities to sell 11 other properties mortgaged to the Bank leaving out the residential unit, as he and his family are residing in the said property. As the same has not been considered, the present writ petition is filed for issuance of a writ of mandamus to that effect.

¶29

4 - NC: 2023:KHC-D:13697 WP No. 103387 of 2023

¶30

Learned advocate appearing for the Bank

¶31

submits that even if all the properties mortgaged are sold, Bank will not be able to realize its dues.

¶32

Admittedly, petitioner has no right to demand

¶33

that the house property has to be sold at the end. There has been no illegality committed by the respondent – Bank. However, nothing prevents the Bank from adopting a humanitarian approach and consider the request of the petitioner and sell the house property after selling all other properties, thereby some time will also be made available to the petitioner to arrange for funds and repay the dues of the Bank.

¶34

However, as the petitioner has no right to make a demand that the house property has to be sold at the end, the writ petition is hereby dismissed subject to the observations made hereinabove.

¶35

Sd/JUDGE

¶36

RSH / Ct-mck List No.: 1 Sl No.: 58

Shri Narayan S/O Ramakrishna Kulkarni v. the Cheif Manager

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shri Narayan S/O Ramakrishna Kulkarni v. the Cheif Manager

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

Daneshwari Road Lines (R) Vs the Managing Director

Kalpataru Vividhoddesha Vs Zilla Panchayat Uttara Kannada

Smt.Rajini @ Anuradha W/O Ganesh Kulkarni Vs the State of Karnataka

Shree Gurudev Bharamanand Education Prasar Society Parmanandwadi Vs the Panchayat Development Officer

Basappa S/O Venkappa Dalawai Vs Model Education Society

Jayashree Alias Madhavi W/O Late G. Ramadu Vs the State of Karnataka