Allowed

Smt Suguna v. Can Fin Homes Ltd.

Karnataka HC7 Nov 2024WP/1904/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition against an order under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act passed in Crl.Misc.No.111/2023. The respondent bank agreed the impugned order would not be given effect to. The High Court quashed the Section 14 order with liberty to file afresh if needed.

What did the court decide?

Impugned Section 14 SARFAESI order dated 07/12/2023 quashed; liberty reserved to the bank to apply afresh.

Smt Suguna Vs Can Fin Homes Ltd. — Banking and Recovery | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2024:KHC:45050 WP No. 1904 of 2024

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 7^TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2024

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR WRIT PETITION NO. 1904 OF 2024 (GM-RES)

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

SMT. SUGUNA S/O MADHU AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS R/O NO.35, ANKANAHALLI VILLAGE BANIKUPEE POST KYLANCHA HOBLI RAMANAGARA TALUK DISTRICT-562159.

¶8

…PETITIONER

¶9

(BY SRI. MAHESHA V., ADVOCATE)

¶10

AND:

¶11

Digitally signed by R HEMALATHA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶12

CAN FIN HOMES LTD SADVI COMPLEX 1^ST FLOOR, B.M. ROAD RAMANAGARA-562159 REP. BY ITS MANAGER.

¶13

…RESPONDENT

¶14

(BY SRI. D. NARAYANASWAMY, ADVOCATE)

¶15

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 07/12/2023 PASSED IN CRL. MISC. NO.111/2023 PASSED BY THE PRL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND CJM AT RAMANAGARA, VIDE ANNEXURE-B AND ETC.

¶16

¶17

NC: 2024:KHC:45050 WP No. 1904 of 2024

¶18

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR

¶19

ORAL ORDER

¶20

The petitioner challenges the order passed under Section 14 of the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (for short `the SARFAESI Act, 2002').

¶21

The learned counsel for the respondent - Bank, on receiving the instructions, submits that the impugned passed under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act, 2002 shall not be given effect to subject to reserving liberty to file a petition under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act, 2002, if need arises.

¶22

The said submission is placed on record.

¶23

Accordingly, I pass the following:

¶24

ORDER

¶25

i) The petition stands allowed.

¶26

ii) The impugned order dated 7.12.2023 passed in Crl.Misc.No.111/2023 by the learned Prl. Senior Civil Judge & CJM, Ramanagara, vide Annexure-B is quashed.

¶27

iii) Liberty is reserved to the respondent to file a petition afresh under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act, 2002, if need arises.

¶28

Sd/(HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR) JUDGE

¶29

BKM

Smt Suguna v. Can Fin Homes Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt Suguna v. Can Fin Homes 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

M/S Cheftalk Food and Hospitality Services Pvt. Ltd. Vs State of Karnataka

Smt. Divya S Vs Canfin Homes Ltd.

Mrs Haseena Vs the Authorized Officer and Chief Manager

Hazrath Hameed Shah Khadri and Hazrath Muhib Shah Khadri (Ra ) Vs the State of Karnataka

M/S Aplomb Builders and Developers Vs the Assistant Registrar of Co. Operative Societies

Mr. Suryakanth Patil Vs Union of India