Disposed

Hoysala Aparment Owners Association v. Canara Bank

Karnataka HC24 Jun 2024WP/7510/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

An apartment owners association petitioned the High Court to have its representation considered for release of original title deeds deposited as equitable mortgage security by the builder, plus release of excess funds in suspense account. The court directed the bank to consider representations in accordance with law within set timeframes.

What did the court decide?

Bank directed to consider Annexure-A representation and additional representation with documents, proceed per law within eight weeks, and take appropriate decision.

Hoysala Aparment Owners Association Vs Canara Bank — Banking and Recovery | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2024:KHC:23027 WP No. 7510 of 2023

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 24^TH DAY OF JUNE, 2024

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO. 7510 OF 2023 (GM-RES)

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

HOYSALA APARMENT OWNERS ASSOCIATION REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT SAMPAT ANAND SHETTY AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS S/O LATE B. ANAND SHETTY OFFICE AT HOYSALA APARTMENTS NO 06, CUNNINGHAM CRESCENT BANGALORE – 560 052.

¶8

…PETITIONER

¶9

(BY SRI. ASHOK MESTA, ADVOCATE)

¶10

AND:

¶11

Digitally signed by ALBHAGYA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶12

CANARA BANK (FORMERLY KNOWN AS SYNDICATE BANK) REPRESENTED BY ITS SENIOR MANAGER OFFICE AT SHOOLAY BRANCH

¶13

BANGALORE – 560 025.

¶14

CANARA BANK REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF MANAGER AND CFO FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT WING OFFICE AT 112, J C ROAD BANGALORE – 560 002.

¶15

CANARA BANK REPRESENTED BY ITS GENERAL MANAGER M D AND CEO’S SECRETARIATE

¶16

¶17

NC: 2024:KHC:23027 WP No. 7510 of 2023

¶18

HEAD OFFICE AT 112, J C ROAD BANGALORE – 560 002.

¶19

…RESPONDENTS

¶20

(BY SRI. ADITYA NARAYAN, ADVOCATE FOR R1 TO R3)

¶21

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING FOR DIRECTION TO CONSIDER THE REPRESENTATION DATED 29/09/2022 VIDE ANNEXURE-A SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER IN THE MATTER OF RELEASING THE ORIGINAL TITLE DEEDS RELATING TO THE HOYSALA APARTMENT BUILDING AS MORE DETAILED IN THE SAID REPRESENTATION VIDE WHICH IS INDISPUTABLY CONTINUING TO BE IN THE CUSTODY OF THE RESPONDENT BANK IN FURTHERANCE OF CREATION OF EQUITABLE MORTGAGE OF BY DEPOSIT OF TITLE DEEDS BY THE THEN BUILDER CUM OWNER OF THE PROPERTY BEARING CORPORATION NO. 8 (OLD NO. 6) SITUATE IN CUNNINGHAM CRESCENT CIVIL STATION IN CORPORATION DIVISION NO. 59, NOW BEARING 16/2, MILLER TANK BUND, BANGALORE AND ETC.

¶22

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

¶23

ORDER

¶24

In this petition, the petitioner seeks the following reliefs:

¶25

“1. Issue a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction to consider the representation dated 29/09/2022 vide Annexure-A submitted by the petitioner in the matter of releasing the original title deeds relating to the Hoysala Apartment Building as more detailed in the said representation vide which is indisputably continuing to be in the custody of the respondent Bank in furtherance of creation of equitable mortgage of by deposit of title deeds by the then builder cum owner of the property bearing Corporation No. 8 (old no. 6) situate in Cunningham Crescent Civil Station in Corporation Division No. 59, now bearing 16/2, Miller Tank Bund, Bangalore;

¶26

3 - NC: 2024:KHC:23027 WP No. 7510 of 2023

¶27

2. Further issue a consequential writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ order or direction to release of the excess amount with interest on the said sum, which amount has been lying in deposit in the suspense account with the respondent Bank in furtherance of the payments made by the individual apartment owners of the petitioner association from time to time in terms of the package deal sanctioned by the then Bank reference Letter No.415/RV/RFC dated 29/05/99 mentioned in release deed bearing No. 211/0418/06/SF/2000/GEN dated 01/06/2000 vide Annexure-B towards relinquishing of the charge of individual apartment of the Hoysala Apartment Building;

¶28

3. Grant the petitioner association such other and further reliefs as this Hon’ble Court deems fit under the facts and circumstances of the case.”

¶29

Heard learned counsel for the respective parties.

¶30

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the representation at Annexure-A dated 29.9.2022 submitted by the petitioner has not been considered by the respondent so far and as such necessary directions may be issued to the respondent in this regard. It is also submitted that the petitioner will submit one more representation along with the relevant documents, which may also be directed to be considered by the respondent.

¶31

Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent/Bank

¶32

submits that if reasonable time is granted, the concerned

¶33

4 - NC: 2024:KHC:23027 WP No. 7510 of 2023

¶34

respondent shall consider the representations of the petitioner and proceed further in accordance with law.

¶35

In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, I deem it just and appropriate to dispose of this petition directing the respondent to consider the representation at Annexure-“A” dated 29.09.2022 as well as the representation and documents to be submitted by the petitioner in accordance with law. Liberty is reserved in favour of the petitioner to submit additional representation along with documents to the respondent within a period of two weeks from today which shall also be considered by the respondent who shall proceed further in accordance with law within a period of eight weeks thereafter and pass appropriate orders and take appropriate decision.

¶36

Subject to the aforesaid directions, the writ petition stands disposed of.

¶37

Pending I.As., if any, stand disposed of.

¶38

Sd/JUDGE

¶39

ALB List No.: 1 Sl No.: 46

Hoysala Aparment Owners Association v. Canara Bank

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hoysala Aparment Owners Association v. Canara Bank

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

Mr Krishna Murthy M Vs the Authorized Officer / Manager

M/S Sharpwatch Investigation and Security Services Pvt. Ltd. Vs State of Karnataka

M/S Annapoorna Communications Vs Bank of Baroda

Smt Lakkamma Vs Pragathi Gramin Bank

M/S Aware Safety Teckniques Vs Punjab National Bank

M/S M K Agrotech Private Limited Vs State of Karnataka