Disposed

Shareef T.S v. the Punjab National Bank

Karnataka HC7 Nov 2023WP/23974/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court disposed of a writ petition seeking directions to allow petitioners to retrieve belongings from property now in bank's possession post-auction, grant permission to reside as tenants, and consider protection of excess sale proceeds. The bank had no objection to the prayer sought.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the 1st Respondent/Bank to permit petitioners to take all their belongings in the subject property on an agreed date.

Shareef T.S Vs the Punjab National Bank — Banking and Recovery | Karnataka HC (2023)

¶1

NC: 2023:KHC:39722 WP No. 23974 of 2023

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 7^TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2023

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA WRIT PETITION NO. 23974 OF 2023 (GM-RES)

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

SHAREEF T.S., S/O SABU LAL T.S., AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS R/AT NEAR AZAD PARK, P.H.COLONY TUMAKURU CITY AND DISTRICT – 572 105.

¶8

SHAHANOOR TAJ AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS W/O LATE ZAMRUD PASHA R/AT 1^ST CROSS JANATHA COLONY, MARALUR TUMAKURU - 572 105.

¶9

…PETITIONERS

¶10

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

¶11

(BY SRI GOPALAKRISHNAMURTHY C., ADVOCATE)

¶12

AND:

¶13

THE PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK TUMAKURU BRANCH, NO. 3463/3381 VIDYANAGAR, 1^ST CROSS, B.H.ROAD TUMAKURU – 572 105 REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORIZED OFFICER/CHIEF MANAGER SRI CHANDRAJEETH KUMAR S/O LATE D.N.MANTO AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS.

¶14

2 - NC: 2023:KHC:39722 WP No. 23974 of 2023

¶15

MOHAMMED ATHAULLA S/O SHAIK AHMED AGE: MAJOR

¶16

3 SYED YASMEEN W/O MOHAMMED ATHAULLA AGE: MAJOR

¶17

BOTH ARE R/AT NO. 06, 2^ND CROSS BEHIND MUSLIM HOSTEL GANGOTHRI NAGAR TUMAKURU AND ALSO: R/AT DOOR NO. 6, 2^ND CROSS BEHIND MUSLIM HOSTEL GANGOTHRI NAGAR, TUMAKURU - 572 105.

¶18

…RESPONDENTS

¶19

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE RECORDS ISSUE A MANDAMUS TO ALLOW THE PETITIONER TO TAKE BACK THEIR BELONGINGS FORTHWITH /IMMEDIATELY AND ALSO ALLOW THEM TO LIVE/RESIDE BY THEM IN THE PETITION SCHEDULE PROPERTY AS TENANTS/AGREEMENT HOLDERS OF R-3 TILL THEY GET THEIR MONEY TO BE RETURNED BACK IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW BY THE R-1 TO 3 AS PER VIDE ANNEXURE-F AND H DTD 30.09.23 RESPECTIVELY TO MEET THE ENDS OF JUSTICE.

¶20

THIS WRIT PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY

¶21

HEARING, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶22

3 - NC: 2023:KHC:39722 WP No. 23974 of 2023

¶23

ORDER

¶24

Petitioners, in the subject petition, have sought for a direction to the 1^st respondent/Bank to permit them to take all their belongings in the premises that they were staying on rent which is now in the possession of the Bank and also for repayment of the amount paid by them while auctioning the subject property.

¶25

Heard Sri Gopalakrishnamurthy.C., learned counsel appearing for petitioners and Sri Vignesh Shetty, learned counsel appearing for 1^st respondent/Bank.

¶26

Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that it would suffice if a direction is issued to the 1^st respondent/Bank to permit them to take all their belongings in the subject property.

¶27

Learned counsel Sri Vignesh Shetty, appearing for 1^st respondent/Bank does not have any objection to the prayer sought for by the petitioners. Therefore, on an appointed date, which shall be on consensus, the petitioners shall be permitted

¶28

¶29

NC: 2023:KHC:39722 WP No. 23974 of 2023

¶30

to take all their belongings in the subject property in which they were the tenants.

¶31

Learned counsel for the petitioners, at this juncture would submit that if the property is put to auction and the sale proceeds would be in excess of what is in due, the amount as advance paid to the borrower be protected. It is for the 1^st respondent/Bank to consider the request of the petitioners at the relevant point in time.

¶32

With the aforesaid observations, petition stands disposed.

¶33

Sd/JUDGE

¶34

BKP

¶35

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 84 CT:SS

Shareef T.S v. the Punjab National Bank

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shareef T.S v. the Punjab National Bank

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

Kittur Chenamma Mahila Vs the State of Karnataka

Santhosh Kumar M Vs Smt M Likitha

Sri Ramana Reddy v Vs Union of India

Smt Usha Rani K N Vs Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Board

Sri. Nazir Khan Vs State of Karnataka

Mr Ramesh P Vs Sri M Visveswaraya Co. Op Bank Ltd.