Dismissed

H K Mariyappa v. Canara Bank

Karnataka HC17 Dec 2024WP/22036/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners sought quashing of a Deputy Commissioner's order relating to secured loan enforcement while repeatedly undertaking to settle the loan account with Canara Bank but failing to do so. The Court dismissed the petition, noting repeated default of undertakings and an alternative efficacious remedy, and imposed costs of Rs 10 lakh payable to the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority.

What the court decided

AI extract

H K Mariyappa Vs Canara Bank — Banking and Recovery | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

1 - NC: 2024:KHC:52204 WP No. 22036 of 2019

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 17^TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2024

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ WRIT PETITION NO.22036 OF 2019 (GM-RES)

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

H.K. MARIYAPPA

¶8

S/O. KUNJAPPA AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS.

¶9

H.K. MUNINANJAPPA S/O. KUNJAPPA AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS.

¶10

H.K. NARAYANASWAMY S/O. KUNJAPPA AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS.

¶11

H.K. RAJANNA S/O. KUNJAPPA AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS.

¶12

AMRUTA W/O. LATE H.K. SUBRAMANI AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS.

¶13

Digitally signed by SHWETHA RAGHAVENDRA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶14

ALL ARE RESIDING AT NO.431 KOTE, HOSAKOTE BENGALURU RURAL-562 114.

¶15

…PETITIONERS

¶16

(BY SRI SARAVANA S., ADVOCATE)

¶17

AND:

¶18

CANARA BANK

¶19

ARM BRANCH, MATISAPLAZA 1ST FLOOR 18TH JUNE ROAD, PANAJI, GOA-403 001 REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORISED OFFICER SRI PONNANGI LOKESH S/O. P. KARUMAIAH.

¶20

2 - NC: 2024:KHC:52204 WP No. 22036 of 2019

¶21

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT DISTRICT OFFICE COMPLEX BEERASANDRA TALUK DEVANAHALLI TALUK BENGALURU-562 110.

¶22

TAHASILDAR HOSKOTE TALUK BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT-562 125.

¶23

HEMANTH KUMAR S/O. MARIYAPPA AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS.

¶24

SMT. PADMA W/O. MARIYAPPA AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS.

¶25

RESPONDENT NOS.4 AND 5 ARE RESIDING AT NO.56/1, KOTE HOSKOTE TOWN BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT-562 114.

¶26

PRESENTLY RESIDING AT NO.613/113, C/O VENUGOPAL 2ND CROSS, ROAD OPPOSITE TO POST OFFICE NEAR SLV ENTERPRISES DODENAKUNDI, MARATHAHALLI BENGALURU-560 037.

¶27

…RESPONDENTS

¶28

(BY SRI R.V. NAIK, ADVOCATE FOR R-1, SRI YOGESH D. NAIK, ADVOCATE, FOR R-2 AND R-3, & SRI BHARATH K., ADVOCATE, FOR R-4 AND R-5)

¶29

¶30

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH ANNEXURE-C, ORDER PASSED BY RESPONDENT NO.2 IN PROCEEDINGS NO.MAG [S.E.C.] CR/06.2018-19, DATED 21.02.2019, AND ETC.

¶31

THIS WRIT PETITION IS COMING ON FOR HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶32

¶33

NC: 2024:KHC:52204 WP No. 22036 of 2019

¶34

CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ

¶35

ORAL ORDER

¶36

The petitioners are before this Court seeking for the

¶37

following reliefs:

¶38

(a) Issue a writ in the nature of certiorari to quash the Annexure-C, order passed by the 2nd respondent in proceedings No.MAG [S.E.C.] CR/06.2018-19, dated 21.02.2019;

¶39

(b) Declare that wherever the contentions regarding fraud is before Debt Recovery Tribunal in respect of the same transaction, it would not be open for the authorities under the Securitization Act to circumvent the proceedings and to proceed under the provisions of the SARFAESI Act ignoring such contentions; and

¶40

(c) Pass such other orders as may be deemed appropriate under the circumstances of the case, in the ends of justice.

¶41

On 29-11-2024, submission was made by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the principal borrower would be closing the loan account within one week from that date. Though there was serious objection and opposition to the same, this Court in order to give one more opportunity to the petitioners, had adjourned the matter to 12-12-2024. On 12-12-2024, when a submission was made by the respondents that no settlement is happening, however, the learned counsel for the petitioners once again requested for three days

¶42

4 - NC: 2024:KHC:52204 WP No. 22036 of 2019

¶43

time to ensure that the loan account is settled in full. Again in spite of opposition from the respondents' counsel, the petitioners were granted time and the matter is listed today, i.e. on 17-12-2024.

¶44

Today, learned counsel for the petitioners' submits that the settlement has not gone through and the payments have not happened.

¶45

In that view of the matter, the undertakings given by the petitioners having been defaulted on several occasions and the petitioners having an alternative efficacious remedy, the petition stands dismissed by imposing costs of `10,00,000/- (Rupees ten lakh only) payable to the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority within a period of four weeks’ from today. If the said amount is not paid, the Legal Services Authority would be entitled to recover the same as arrears of land revenue.

¶46

KVK List No.: 2 Sl No.: 13

¶47

Sd/(SURAJ GOVINDARAJ) JUDGE

H K Mariyappa v. Canara Bank

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

H K Mariyappa v. Canara Bank

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

N. Krishna Vs M/S Bamul Nowkarara Vividoddesha Sahakara Niyamitha

Ms. Afifa Azmi Vs Rajiv Gandhi University of Health Sciences

Sri Shambulingeshwara Educational Trust (R) Vs the State of Karnataka

Smt Alima Fouzia Vs the Joint / Additional Registrar of Co. Operative Societies (441)

Sri. Basavarajendra High School Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri. P G Tejappa Vs Registrar of Co-Operative Societies