Disposed

Smt Prasad H v. Godha Krishna v Hdfc Bank Ltd.

Karnataka HC11 Sept 2024WP/24176/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Borrower challenged auction of secured assets under Rule 8(6) of the SARFAESI Rules. After depositing Rs. 50 lakhs and undertaking to pay Rs. 67.89 lakhs with tenant rents routed to an escrow account, the court disposed of the petition directing payment within three weeks, failing which the bank may proceed in accordance with law.

What did the court decide?

Petition disposed of directing deposit of Rs. 67,89,000 within three weeks and rent into escrow account; bank free to proceed per law on default.

Smt Prasad H v Godha Krishna Vs Hdfc Bank Ltd. — Banking and Recovery | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2024:KHC:38168 WP No. 24176 of 2024

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 11^TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2024

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR WRIT PETITION NO. 24176 OF 2024 (GM-RES)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

SMT. PRASAD H V GODHA KRISHNA, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, PROPRIETOR, M/S KRISHNA P G, NO. 116/2-1, HOUSE NO.116 AND 116/5, 11TH CROSS, MALLESHWARAM, BENGALURU - 560 003.

¶9

…PETITIONER

¶10

(BY SRI. MAHESH KIRAN SHETTY, ADVOCATE) AND:

¶11

HDFC BANK LTD., KASTURBA ROAD BRANCH, RETAIL PORTFOLIO MANAGEMENT, NO. 24/3, HDFC HOUSE NO. 51, KASTURBA ROAD, BANGALORE - 560 001, REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORIZED OFFICER.

¶12

Digitally signed by R HEMALATHA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶13

(BY SRI. FRANCIS XAVIER, ADVOCATE)

¶14

…RESPONDENT

¶15

THIS W.P IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED SALE NOTICE DATED 26.07.2024 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT U/R 8(6) OF THE SECURITY INTEREST RULES 2002 AT ANNX-A IN SO FAR AS PETITIONER IS CONCERNED AND ETC.,

¶16

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶17

¶18

NC: 2024:KHC:38168 WP No. 24176 of 2024

¶19

CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR

¶20

ORAL ORDER

¶21

The petitioner has challenged the sale notice issued under Rule 8(6) read with Rule 9 of the Security Interest (Enforcement) Rules, 2002, by which the secured assets belonging to the petitioner, offered as security for the repayment of the loan, were sought to be auctioned in a public auction. The sale, scheduled for 02.09.2024, did not take place following the interim order granted by this Court. The petitioner deposited a sum of Rs. 50 lakhs by way of demand draft towards part payment for the regularization of the loan account.

¶22

The learned counsel for the respondent-Bank submits that after adjusting the sum of Rs. 50 lakhs, the petitioner is due a sum of Rs. 67,89,000 towards the regularization of the loan account.

¶23

The petitioner has filed an affidavit undertaking to pay the balance amount of Rs. 67,89,000 within three weeks and has also furnished the details of the tenants occupying the scheduled premises, undertaking that the tenants will deposit the rent into the account of the respondent-Bank.

¶24

The learned counsel for the petitioner has filed an affidavit providing the details of the tenants and undertaking to deposit Rs. 12 lakhs every month.

¶25

¶26

NC: 2024:KHC:38168 WP No. 24176 of 2024

¶27

5. The same has been placed on record.

¶28

Therefore, the petition stands disposed of, directing the petitioner to deposit the balance amount of Rs. 67,89,000 towards the regularization of the loan account within three weeks from today.

¶29

The petitioner shall provide the details of the escrow account to the tenants occupying the scheduled premises to enable them to deposit the monthly rent in favor of the respondent-Bank.

¶30

In the event that the tenants fail to deposit the rent into the escrow account, the petitioner shall be liable to pay the monthly installments. In the event of default in payment of the amount due, the respondent-Bank shall be at liberty to proceed in accordance with the law.

¶31

Sd/(HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR) JUDGE

¶32

TIN List No.: 1 Sl No.: 67 CT: BHK

Smt Prasad H v. Godha Krishna v Hdfc Bank Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt Prasad H v. Godha Krishna v Hdfc Bank 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

Sri Bettappa T Vs Sri Nataraj Venkatesh

Smt Shivani Vs Smt T Shivananjamma

Mrs B S Chudamani Vs Mr Irudayaraju @ Rajan

Sri Brs Guardian Manpower and Allied Services Pvt. Ltd., Vs Union of India

Puttaraju S T Vs the State of Karnataka

K. S. Shivanna Vs State of Karnataka