Disposed

Smt. Pushpalatha v. Can Fin Homes Limited

Karnataka HC13 Nov 2024WP/8779/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court of Karnataka directed Credit Suisse (Respondent Bank) to furnish loan account statement to the petitioner within a week. Petitioner to settle account if provided. Upon settlement, bank ordered to release original title deed.

What did the court decide?

Directed respondent-bank to furnish statement of accounts within one week. Petitioner directed to settle account; upon settlement, bank to release original title deed.

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

¶1

1 - NC: 2024:KHC:46030 WP No. 8779 of 2024

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 13^TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2024

¶3

BEFORE

¶4

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR WRIT PETITION NO. 8779 OF 2024 (GM-RES)

¶5

BETWEEN:

¶6

SMT. PUSHPALATHA W/O RANGHASWAMY AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS R/AT 45, P.V.R. NIVAS DONNEKALLU MAIN ROAD, CHANDRAMOULESHWARA LAYOUT NEAR WATER TANK, HESARAGHATTA BENGALURU NORTH TALUK BENGALURU-560 088.

¶7

…PETITIONER

¶8

(BY SRI. M. VINAYA KEERTHY, ADVOCATE)

¶9

AND:

¶10

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

¶11

CAN FIN HOMES LIMITED NON-BANKING FINANCE COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER COMPANIES ACT-1956 REGULATED UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF THE NATIONAL HOUSING BANK ACT-1987 HAVING BRANCH OFFICE AT SRI ANNAPOORNESHWARI COMPLEX ABOVE CANARA BANK, BGS ROAD, BIDADI, BENGALURU-562 109 REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORIZED OFFICER SRI. SHIVA V.R.

¶12

SUSHEELA W/O LATE SURESH S H AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS

¶13

AISHWARYA D/O LATE SRUESH S H AGED ABOUT 15 YEARS

¶14

¶15

NC: 2024:KHC:46030 WP No. 8779 of 2024

¶16

RESPONDENT NOS.2 AND 3 ARE R/AT NO.45, 3^RD FLOOR 1^ST MAIN, NEAR MAHALAKSHMI TEMPLE ROAD PIPELINE, ABBIGERE, CHIKKABANAVARA POST BENGALUR-560 090.

¶17

…RESPONDENTS

¶18

(BY SRI. MANJUNATH C., ADVOCATE)

¶19

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECTION TO RESPONDENT NO. 1 NOT TO CONDUCT AUCTION SALE/ PROCEEDINGS OR CREATE THIRD PARTY INTEREST WITH RESPECT TO SCHEDULE PROPERTY AND ETC.

¶20

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

¶21

CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR

¶22

ORAL ORDER

¶23

The petitioner challenges the proceedings initiated by the respondent-Bank under the provisions of the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (hereinafter referred to as the “SARFAESI Act, 2002”).

¶24

The petitioner contends that the borrower of the loan, while suppressing the fact of the mortgage, conveyed the subject property to the petitioner through a registered sale deed dated 19.01.2017.

¶25

The petitioner’s grievance is that the respondent-Bank, without providing the statement of accounts and without affording

¶26

3 - NC: 2024:KHC:46030 WP No. 8779 of 2024

¶27

sufficient time to clear the loan account, is attempting to evict the petitioner in relation to the mortgaged property.

¶28

The learned counsel for the respondent-Bank submits that, in the event the petitioner discharges the entire loan amount, no precipitative action will be taken concerning the mortgaged property.

¶29

The submission of the learned counsel for the respondent-Bank is placed on record.

¶30

In light of the above, it is deemed appropriate to dispose of the petition by directing the respondent-Bank to furnish the statement of accounts pertaining to the loan account to the petitioner within one week from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order.

¶31

Upon receiving the statement of accounts, the petitioner is directed to settle the loan account in accordance with the law.

¶32

In the event that the petitioner closes the loan account by depositing the entire outstanding amount, the respondent-Bank shall release the original title deed related to the mortgaged property to the petitioner.

¶33

Ordered accordingly.

¶34

Sd/(HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR) JUDGE

¶35

Smt. Pushpalatha v. Can Fin Homes Limited

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Pushpalatha v. Can Fin Homes Limited

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

Smt. Gangamma Vs Sri. Anjinappa

Sri D R Devendra Raju Vs Sri S Rathinam

Sri. Dharmendra @ Subhash Vs Smt. C R Jyothi @ Yamuna C R

R Suresh Vs the Chairman and Managing Director

Smt Jayanthi Vs State of Karnataka

H G Ashoka Vs State of Karnataka