Disposed

Shivashankar S a v. M/S the National Co. Operative Bank Ltd.

Karnataka HC15 Feb 2023WP/2279/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition challenging a vacating notice under SARFAESI Act, the High Court rejected the petitioners' request for a stay until May 31, 2023. It permitted voluntary vacating possession by May 15, 2023, allowing time to recover lease money, while permitting the bank to enforce action if the deadline is missed.

What did the court decide?

Vacating postponed voluntarily to 15.05.2023; stay until 31.05.2023 rejected; others.

Shivashankar S a Vs M/S the National Co. Operative… — Banking and Recovery | Karnataka HC (2023)

¶1

¶2

WP No. 2279 of 2023

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 15^TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2023 BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO.2279 OF 2023 (GM-RES)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

MR. SHIVASHANKAR S A S/O LATE ANANTHA RAM AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS R/AT NO.379 FLAT NO.A-1 1^ST FLOOR, 14^TH CROSS PURNAPRAGNA LAYOUT OPP. BMTC BUS DIPPO UTTARAHALLIL BENGALURU - 560061

¶9

Digitally signed by PADMAVATHI B K Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶10

MR. K S RAJU S/O LATE K SURYANARAYANA RAO AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS R/AT NO.379, FLAT NO.A-2 1^ST FLOOR, 14^TH CROSS PURNAPRAGNA LAYOUT OPP. BMTC BUS DIPPO UTTARAHALLIL BENGALURU - 560061.

¶11

MRS. SAKAMMA AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS R/AT NO.379 FLAT NO.B-2 1^ST FLOOR, 14^TH CROSS PURNAPRAGNA LAYOUT OPP. BMTC BUS DIPPO UTTARAHALLIL BENGALURU - 560061

¶12

…PETITIONERS

¶13

(BY SRI. R P SOMASHEKHARAIAH, ADVOCATE)

¶14

¶15

WP No. 2279 of 2023

¶16

AND:

¶17

M/S. THE NATIONAL CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD A CO-OPERATIVE BANK REGISTERED UNDER THE KARNATAKA CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES ACT,1959 NO.73/1 ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE, GANDHI BAZAAR MAIN ROAD BENGALURU -560004 REP. BY ITS AUTHORIZED OFFICER.

¶18

MR. BHASKAR NAIDU T S/O LATE T SIDDAYA NAIDU AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS R/AT NO.379 OPP BMTC BUS DIPPO VADDARAPALYA VILLAGE UTTARAHALLI HOBLI BENGALURU – 560061.

¶19

…RESPONDENTS

¶20

(BY SRI. K V LOKESH, ADVOCATE FOR R1)

¶21

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO-SET ASIDE THE VACATING NOTICE ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT BANK NO.1 DATED 11.01.2023 ADDRESSING THE RESPONDENT NO. 2 VIDE ANNEXURE-E; AND ETC.

¶22

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶23

ORDER

¶24

Petitioners are before this Court calling in question the

¶25

notice issued to the residents of the premises which is now a subject matter of proceedings under SARFAESI Act, 2002. Petitioners, who are the tenants of the said premises, have knocked at the doors of this Court seeking breathing time to

¶26

¶27

WP No. 2279 of 2023

¶28

vacate the premises and to avail of such remedy as is available under law. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners files an affidavit indicating the timeline in which the petitioners would vacate the premises and avail of such remedy as is available in law. The affidavit reads as under:

¶29

“ AFFIDAVIT

¶30

I, Mr. K.S. RAJU s/o K. Suryanarayana Rao, aged about 57 years R/at No.379, Flat No.A-2, 1^st Floor 14^th Cross, Purnapragna Layout, Opp. BMTC Bus Dippo, Uttarahalli, Bengaluru – 560 061, today at Bengaluru, do hereby solemnly affirm and state on oath as follows:

¶31

1. I state that I am the petitioner No.2 in the above case, well aware of the facts and circumstances of the case. Hence deposing to this affidavit.

¶32

2. I state that petitioner No.1 has entered into the lease agreement with respondent No.2 on 03.09.2021 for a sum of Rs.15 lakhs which was paid by way of cheque.

¶33

3. I state that I have entered into the Lease Agreement with respondent No.2 on 10.11.2021 for a sum of Rs.15.5 lakhs which was paid by way of online payment, cheque and cash.

¶34

4. I state that the petitioner No.3 has entered into the lease agreement with respondent No.2 on 20.06.2022 for a sum of Rs.14.5 lakh which was paid by way of RTGS and cheque.

¶35

¶36

WP No. 2279 of 2023

¶37

5. I state that I along with other petitioners were shocked to learn, upon enquiry with the officials of respondent No.1 Bank that the respondent No.2 had availed certain credit facilities from respondent No.1 Bank and that the respondent No.1 Bank was only proposing to enforce its rights against the mortgaged Scheduled Property. And that I and other petitioners were informed that the respondent No.2 had mortgaged the Schedule Property with respondent Bank No.1 and thereafter the respondent No.2 had failed to repay the loan and defaulted in this regard.

¶38

6. I state that me and other petitioners are neither in any way connected even remotely to the loan borrowed by respondent No.2 nor are we the beneficiaries of the said loan sanctioned by respondent No.2 bank but yet we are made the scapegoat by respondents in this regard.

¶39

7. I hereby state that in these circumstances the respondent No.1 Bank issued me and other Petitioners a Vacating Notice dated 11.01.2023 to vacate the schedule premises within seven days without considering our circumstances as to the said loan account of respondent No.2.

¶40

8. I further state and pray before this Hon’ble Court to direct the respondent No.2 to repay the said lease amount to me and other petitioners as stated above and as well as in the petition in this above case along with the penal interest of 24% p.a. fro the mental agony caused by the respondents.

¶41

¶42

WP No. 2279 of 2023

¶43

9. I state that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to grant us a period until 31.05.2023 as the families of petitioners have children who are scheduled with exams approaching in nearby time and that they shall be the worst victims of the actions that shall be taken by respondent No.1 Bank. And that the above mentioned time period is also for the purpose to look out for an alternative accommodation and also to recover the lease amount to be recovered from respondent No.2.

¶44

10. I humbly request this Hon’ble Court that in meanwhile and direct the respondent No.1 Bank not to proceed with any actions against the Schedule property and also direct the respondent No.2 to repay the respective lease amount to petitioners as stated above.

¶45

11. I state that if this application is not allowed no harm shall be caused to opposite side but on the other hand if this application is not allowed then I and other petitioners shall be subject to extreme loss and hardship which shall not be compensated by any other means, hence this application.

¶46

WHEREFORE, this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to grant and allow us the petitioners a time period upto 31.05.2023 as the families of petitioners have children who are scheduled with exams approaching in nearby time and that they shall be the worst victims of any actions that shall be taken by respondent No.1 Bank and also for the purpose of Petitioners to look out for an alternative accommodation

¶47

¶48

WP No. 2279 of 2023

¶49

and also to recover the lease amount to be recovered from respondent No.2.

¶50

This is my name and signature and I declare that what is stated above is true to the best of my knowledge, belief and information.

¶51

DEPONENT ”

¶52

Therefore, the petitioners shall abide by the undertaking so made in the affidavit. The only modification is that the petitioners would not be entitled to stay up to 31^st May, 2023, but shall voluntarily handover the vacant possession of the property to the Bank on or before 15^th May, 2023 and avail such remedy as is available under law. In the event if the petitioners would not vacate on or before 15^th May, 2023, the Bank is at liberty to take action in accordance with law to get the petitioners vacated from the property.

¶53

With the aforesaid observation, petition stands disposed

of.

Sd/JUDGE

LNN

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 39

Shivashankar S a v. M/S the National Co. Operative Bank Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shivashankar S a v. M/S the National Co. Operative Bank Ltd.

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

The Hotel Industrialists Co. Op Bank Ltd. Vs State of Karnataka

Sri.Bharath Vs City Union Bank Ltd.

Sri Ali Hussain @ Gas Ali Vs State of Karnataka

Smt.Neerajakshi Vs the State of Karnataka

Smt. Pavithra T N Vs State of Karnataka

Sri. L Narsimhaiah Vs Reserve Bank of India