Disposed

Ramesh B Gowda v. Karnataka Bank Ltd.

Karnataka HC6 Jun 2024WP/10973/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of two connected writ petitions involving a bank loan dispute and auction sale. Instead of deciding on merits, the Court directed the Appellate Tribunal to club appeals and dispose them within three months, while restraining construction on the premises.

What did the court decide?

Both writ petitions disposed; liberty reserved for auction purchaser to file appeal; DRAT directed to club and dispose appeals in 3 months; construction on premises restrained until appeal disposal.

Ramesh B Gowda Vs Karnataka Bank Ltd. — Banking and Recovery | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2024:KHC:19721 WP No. 10973 of 2024 C/W WP No. 5621 of 2024

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 6^TH DAY OF JUNE, 2024

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR

¶7

WRIT PETITION NO.10973 OF 2024 (GM-RES)

¶8

C/W

¶9

WRIT PETITION NO.5621 OF 2024 (GM-DRT)

¶10

IN W.P.NO.10973/2024:

¶11

BETWEEN:

¶12

RAMESH B GOWDA SON OF BOMME GOWDA, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS

¶13

RAMYA G.C.

¶14

W/O RAMESH B GOWDA, AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS,

¶15

Digitally signed by Vandana S Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶16

BOTH ARE R/AT NO.325/1, 14^TH MAIN, 5^TH CROSS, R.M.V. EXTENSION, SADASHIVANAGAR, BANGALORE-560 080.

¶17

…PETITIONERS

¶18

(BY SRI. DHANANJAI JOSHI, SENIOR COUNSEL FOR SMT. SNEHA NAGARAJ, ADVOCATE)

¶19

AND:

¶20

KARNATAKA BANK LTD., CHIKKAMAGALURU AGRICULTURE DEVELOPMENT BRANCH, IG ROAD, CHIKKAMAGALURU-577101 REPRESENTED BY THE BRANCH MANAGER, ALONG WITH AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE

¶21

ALSO AT: ASSET RECOVERY MANAGEMENT BRANCH, 3^RD FLOOR, KARNATAKA BANK BUILDING,

¶22

¶23

NC: 2024:KHC:19721 WP No. 10973 of 2024 C/W WP No. 5621 of 2024

¶24

KODAILBAIL, MANGALORE-575003 REPRESENTED BY

¶25

CHIEF MANAGER AND AUTHORIZED OFFICER.

¶26

MR. D.L. VIJAY KUMAR SON OF LATE D.R. LINGE GOWDA AGED ABOUT 69 YEARS RESIDING AT P.B NO.77, NAIDU STREET, NEAR HEAD POST OFFICE CHIKMAGALURU – 577 101.

¶27

…RESPONDENTS

¶28

(BY SRI.S. SRIRANGA, SENIOR COUNSEL FOR SRI. SUMANA NAGANAND AND SMT. ASHWINI RAVINDRA, ADVOCATE FOR R-1; SRI. BIPIN HEGDE, ADVOCATE FOR SMT. LATHA S. SHETTY, ADVOCATE FOR R-2)

¶29

THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENTS TO RESTRUCTURE THE LOAN/CONSIDER ONE TIME SETTLEMENT/ REGULARIZE THE LOAN ACCOUNT OF THE PETITIONERS BY RE-OPENING THE LOAN ACCOUNT FOR REPAYMENT OF THE LOAN AND ETC.

¶30

IN W.P.NO.5621/2024:

¶31

BETWEEN:

¶32

DR. D.L. VIJAYAKUMAR AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS S/O LATE D.R. LINGE GOWDA RESIDING AT P.B.No.77, NAIDU STREET NEAR HEAD POST OFFICE CHIKKAMANGALURU – 577 101.

¶33

…PETITIONER

¶34

(BY SRI. BIPIN HEDGE, ADVOCATE FOR SMT. LATHA S. SHETTY, ADVOCATE)

¶35

AND:

¶36

SRI. RAMESH B.GOWDA AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS S/O BOMMEGOWDA

¶37

3 - NC: 2024:KHC:19721 WP No. 10973 of 2024 C/W WP No. 5621 of 2024

¶38

NO. 325/1, 14^TH MAIN, 5^TH CROSS RMV EXTENSION, SADASHIVNAGAR BENGALURU – 560 080.

¶39

RAMYA G.C. W/O RAMESH GOWDA AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS NO.325/1, 14^TH MAIN, 5^TH CROSS RMV EXTENSION, SADASHIVNAGAR BENGALURU – 560 080.

¶40

KUMARASWAMY .A.B., AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS SON OF BOREGOWDA A.L. ALADAHALLI VILLAGE DABBEGATTA HOBLI, TUVEKERE TALUK

¶41

TUMKUR – 576 224.

¶42

KARNATAKA BANK LTD., A COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER THE INDIAN COMPANIES ACT, 1913 REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF MANAGER HAVING HEAD OFFICE AT PB.No.599 MAHAVEERA CIRCLE, KANKANADY MANGALURU – 575 002.

¶43

THE AUTHORISED OFFICER KARNATAKA BANK LIMITED, A COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER THE INDIAN COMPANIES ACT, 1913, ASSET RECOVERY BRANCH, KARNATAKA BANK BUILDING, KODIALBAIL, MANGALURU 575 003. REP. BY CHAIR MANAGER.

¶44

…RESPONDENTS

¶45

(BY SRI. SUMANA NAGANAND, ADVOCATE FOR R-4 & R-5)

¶46

THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 06.10.2023 PASSED BY THE HON’BLE DRT-1 IN SA NO.77/2021 (ANNEXURE-A).

¶47

¶48

NC: 2024:KHC:19721 WP No. 10973 of 2024 C/W WP No. 5621 of 2024

¶49

THESE PETITIONS, COMING ON FOR ORDERS , THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶50

ORDER

¶51

In W.P.No.10973/2024, petitioners have sought for the following reliefs:-

¶52

(i) Issue writ in the nature of mandamus, order, direction or any other appropriate writ directing the respondent to restructure the loan / consider one-time settlement / regularize the loan account of the petitioners by re-opening the loan account for repayment of the loan.

¶53

(ii) Issue a writ of mandamus directing the respondent No.1 to reclaim possession of the schedule property from the respondent No.2.

¶54

(iii) Set aside the order dated 31.01.2020 passed by the learned District Magistrate, Chikkamagaluru passed in No.A2/KABAVA/CR/110/2019-20 and redeem the schedule property and handover possession of the schedule property to the petitioners;

¶55

(iv) To grant such other reliefs to the petitioners as deemed fit in the facts and circumstances of the case, in the interests of justice and equity.

¶56

In W.P.No.5621/2024, petitioner has sought for the following reliefs:-

¶57

(i) Issue a writ of certiorari or any other writ, order or direction, quashing the order dated 06.10.2023 passed by the Hon’ble DRT-1 in SA No.77/2021 (Annexure A);

¶58

5 - NC: 2024:KHC:19721 WP No. 10973 of 2024 C/W WP No. 5621 of 2024

¶59

(ii) Grant any such reliefs as this Hon’ble Court deems fit or proper in the interest of justice and equity.

¶60

Heard learned Senior counsel for the petitioner and

¶61

learned Senior Counsel for the respondents and perused the material on record.

¶62

A perusal of the material on record will indicate that petitioners in W.P.No.10973/2024 i.e., Ramesh B. Gowda and his wife Smt. Ramya G.C., filed S.A.No.77/2021 before the DRT-1, Bangalore, against the 1^st respondent – Bank and 2^nd respondent - auction purchaser - Sri.D.L.Vijayakumar, who contested the said application, which was ultimately allowed by the DRT vide order dated 06.10.2023. Aggrieved by the said order, the Bank has preferred an appeal in Diary No.485/2024 which is pending before the DRAT, Chennai. Aggrieved by the very same order, the auction purchaser Sri.D.L.Vijayakumar has preferred the instant W.P.No.5621/2024 before this Court.

¶63

Learned Senior Counsel for the auction purchaser, Sri.D.L.Vijayakumar submits that he would also prefer an appeal before the DRAT, Chennai and necessary directions may be issued

¶64

6 - NC: 2024:KHC:19721 WP No. 10973 of 2024 C/W WP No. 5621 of 2024

¶65

to the DRAT to club and consolidate both appeal Diary No.485/2024 along with the appeal to be preferred by the auction purchaser by directing the DRAT to dispose of both the appeals within a stipulated timeframe.

¶66

Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners in W.P.No.10973/2024 submits that they would contest both the appeals before the DRAT and in addition thereto, the parties may be directed not to carry on any construction activity in the subject shops / premises till disposal of the appeals by the DRAT.

¶67

The learned counsel for the respondent – Bank would also submit that he has no objection for both the petitions to be disposed of by issuing necessary directions.

¶68

In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, though several contentions have been urged by all the parties, in both the petitions as well as before the DRAT, Chennai, without expressing any opinion on the merits / demerits of any of the rival contentions, I deem it just and appropriate to dispose of both the petitions by issuing certain directions.

¶69

¶70

NC: 2024:KHC:19721 WP No. 10973 of 2024 C/W WP No. 5621 of 2024

¶71

8. in the result, I pass the following:

¶72

ORDER

¶73

(i) Both W.P.No.10973/2024 and

¶74

W.P.No.5621/2024 are hereby disposed of.

¶75

(ii) Liberty is reserved in favour of the petitioner (auction purchaser) in W.P.No.5621/2024 to file an appeal before the DRAT, Chennai, against the impugned order dated 06.10.2023 passed by the DRT in SA 77/2021, which shall be considered by the DRAT in accordance with law.

¶76

(iii) In the event, the petitioner in W.P.No.5621/2024 files such an appeal, the DRAT, Chennai before whom the appeal in Appeal No.Diary No.485/2024 filed by the respondent – Karnataka Bank is pending is directed to club, consolidate and dispose of both the appeals together, in accordance with law.

¶77

(iv) The DRAT, Chennai, is directed to dispose of both the appeals within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶78

(v) It is further directed that till disposal of the appeals by the DRAT, no further construction activity on

¶79

NC: 2024:KHC:19721 WP No. 10973 of 2024 C/W WP No. 5621 of 2024

¶80

¶81

the subject premises / shop premises shall be undertaken up by any of the parties.

¶82

(vi) All rival contentions between the parties are

¶83

kept open and no opinion is expressed on the same.

¶84

Sd/JUDGE

¶85

SV/SRL

Ramesh B Gowda v. Karnataka Bank Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ramesh B Gowda v. Karnataka Bank Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mrs Rajeshwari Vs Bank of India

J H Prasanna Kumar Vs Muthoot Mini Financier Ltd.

M/S Vandana Alpyine Projects Vs the Authorised Officer, Canara Bank

Mr. N. Lokesh Kumar Vs Canara Bank

Neelakantappa Vs Canara Bank

Bangalore South Sports and Cultural Club, Vs the State of Karnataka