This Court directed the Debt Recovery Tribunal to consider and dispose of the transfer application and a counter claim filed by the petitioners within six months. The matter was disposed without adjudicating the merits of the claim.
Direct the DRT to consider and decide the counter claim of Rs. 1299.53 crores within six months.
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.
WP No. 1770 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF MARCH, 2023
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA WRIT PETITION NO. 1770 OF 2022 (GM-DRT)
BETWEEN:
Digitally signed by PADMAVATHI B K Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
WP No. 1770 of 2022
…PETITIONERS (BY SRI DHYAN CHINNAPPA, SENIOR COUNSEL FOR SRI VASUDEVAN. H. N., ADVOCATE)
AND:
WP No. 1770 of 2022
STATE BANK OF INDIA, SPECIALIZED MID CORPORATE BRANCH, 136, RAILWAY PARALLEL ROAD, KUMARAPARK WEST, BANGALORE-560 020.
…RESPONDENTS
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ALLOW THE COUNTER CLAIM TO THE TUNE OF RS. 1299.53 CRORES TO THE PETITIONER COMPANY IN ACCORDANCE WITH CLAIM FILED ON 9TH AUGUST 2018 BEFORE DRT, BENGALURU IN T.A.NO.252/2017 (O.A. NO.21/2015) AND DIRECT THE BANK TO PAY THE SAID AMOUNT AS PER SECTION 19 (18) OF THE RDDB ACT, 1993 (ANNEXURE-AV) AND ETC.,
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
The petitioners are before this Court seeking the following
prayer:
WP No. 1770 of 2022
with claim filed on 9th august 2018 before DRT 1, Bengaluru in T.A.No.252/2017 (O.A.No.21/2015) and direct the bank to pay the said amount as per Section 19 (18) of the RDDB Act, 1993 (Annexure – AV).
WP No. 1770 of 2022
proceedings within six months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, if not earlier.
It is made clear that this Court has not considered or pronounced upon the merit of the claim of the petitioners in the subject petition.
Sd/JUDGE
NVJ
List No.: 1 Sl No.: 66 CT: SS
1 issue framed by the court
Whether this Court should direct the Debt Recovery Tribunal to consider the petitioners' counter claim within a specific timeframe.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
B.Prashanth Hegde and others
State Bank of India and others
M. Nagaprasanna
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
