Disposed

Manjunath M R, v. the Manager

Karnataka HC23 Aug 2024WP/19288/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Borrowers challenged a Section 14 SARFAESI Act possession order after defaulting on loan repayment and failing to comply with an interim deposit condition. The Court disposed of the writ petitions by directing the Bank to consider their One Time Settlement proposal within four weeks, with no precipitative action until then.

What did the court decide?

Bank directed to consider petitioners' OTS proposal within four weeks; no precipitative action until then.

Manjunath M R, Vs the Manager — Banking and Recovery | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

1 - NC: 2024:KHC:33969 WP No. 19288 of 2024 C/W WP No. 19321 of 2024

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 23^RD DAY OF AUGUST, 2024

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO. 19288 OF 2024 (GM-RES)

¶7

C/W

¶8

WRIT PETITION NO. 19321 OF 2024 (GM-RES)

¶9

IN WP NO.19288/2024:

¶10

BETWEEN:

¶11

MANJUNATH M R, S/O, RAMEGOWDA K T, AGED ABOUT 71 YEARS, R/O MALLAPURA VILLAGE, GENDEHALLI POST, BELUR TALUK, HASSAN DIS-573201, (SENIOR CITIZEN BENEFIT NOT CLAIMED).

¶12

…PETITIONER

¶13

(BY SRI SANCHAN JAI NANDAN, ADVOCATE)

¶14

AND:

¶15

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

¶16

THE MANAGER, THE CANARA BANK LTD., REGISTERED HEAD OFFICE AT, CIRCLE OFFICE, BALMATTA ROAD, MANAGALORE-575003, REP. BY THE BRANCH MANAGER. BRANCH OFFICE AT THE MANAGER NO.6, MODERN COMPLEX, MAIN ROAD BELUR, BELUR, HASSAN DIS -57311.

¶17

…RESPONDENT

¶18

(BY MISS NATASHA N MURTHY FOR, SRI VIGNESH SHETTY, ADVOCATE)

¶19

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO

¶20

NC: 2024:KHC:33969 WP No. 19288 of 2024 C/W WP No. 19321 of 2024

¶21

¶22

QUASH THE ANNX-E THAT IS ORDER DTD. 06.07.2024 PASSED BY THE PRL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND CJM AT HASSAN IN CRL MISC 108/2023 IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.

¶23

IN WP NO.19321/2024:

¶24

BETWEEN:

¶25

ASHA H.M, W/O, MANJUNATH M. R, AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, R/O, SANNIDHI ESTATE, MALLAPURA VILLAGE, GENDEHALLI POST, BELUR TALUK, HASSAN DIS-573201, (SENIOR CITIZEN BENEFIT NOT CLAIMED)

¶26

…PETITIONER

¶27

(BY SRI SANCHAN JAI NANDAN, ADVOCATE)

¶28

AND:

¶29

THE MANAGER, CANARA BANK LTD., REGISTERED HEAD OFFICE AT, CIRCLE OFFICE, BALMATTA ROAD, MANAGALORE-575003, BRANCH OFFICE AT THE MANAGER NO.6, MODERN COMPLEX, MAIN ROAD, BELUR, HASSAN DISTRICT -573115.

¶30

…RESPONDENT

¶31

(BY MISS NATASHA N MURTHY, ADVOCATE FOR SRI VIGHNESH SHETTY, ADVOCATE)

¶32

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO A) QUASHING THE ANNEXURE-E THAT IS ORDER DTD 06.07.24 PASSED BY THE PRL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND CJM AT HASSAN IN CRL. MISC 109/23.

¶33

THESE PETITIONS COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶34

CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR

¶35

¶36

NC: 2024:KHC:33969 WP No. 19288 of 2024 C/W WP No. 19321 of 2024

¶37

ORAL ORDER

¶38

The petitioners challenge the order passed under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act, which permits the respondent Bank to take possession of the secured asset belonging to the petitioners, who had defaulted on loan repayment.

¶39

This Court, by order dated 22.07.2024, granted an interim stay subject to the petitioners depositing a sum of Rs.50.00 lakhs with the respondent Bank on or before 22.08.2024. The petitioners have not complied with this interim order.

¶40

The petitioners undertake to pay a sum of Rs.60.00 lakhs towards part payment under the One Time Settlement Scheme (OTS), if accepted by the respondent Bank.

¶41

The learned counsel for the petitioners, on instructions, submits that the petitioners be permitted to submit a proposal to the respondent Bank for the OTS scheme and undertake to pay Rs.60.00 lakhs forthwith, should the OTS scheme be accepted by the respondent Bank.

¶42

4 - NC: 2024:KHC:33969 WP No. 19288 of 2024 C/W WP No. 19321 of 2024

¶43

Therefore, it is expedient to dispose of these petitions by directing the respondent Bank to consider the OTS proposal, if submitted by the petitioners, in accordance with the existing regulations. The respondent Bank is to consider the proposal, if submitted by the petitioners, within four weeks from today. Until then, the respondent Bank shall not take any precipitative action against the petitioners.

¶44

Sd/-

¶45

(HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR) JUDGE

¶46

VGR

Manjunath M R, v. the Manager

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Manjunath M R, v. the Manager

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

Sri Vinaya K P Vs Kodagu District Co. Operative Central Bank Ltd.

Smt Bhavani Sundar Vs Canara Bank

Sri D Damodarachetty Vs Bank of Baroda

Mr Antony Pauly Mukkannikkal Vs the State of Karnataka

M/S. Nadimar Service Station Vs Icici Bank Ltd.

Sri. Mohammed Peer @ Munna Vs the Chief Superintendent