Disposed¶45

Mr. Harishchandra Acharya v. Canara Bank.

Karnataka HC1 Sept 2025WP/10802/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

NC: 2025:KHC:34125; High Court of Karnataka at Bengaluru; WP No. 10802 of 2025 (GM-RES); Harishchandra Acharya v. Canara Bank & Branch Manager, Uppinangady; SARFAESI Act 2002; possession notice dated 16.12.2024 (Annexure-A); interim stay dated 22.04.2025 conditional on 20% deposit; writ petition disposed of for non-prosecution — office objections including non-payment of Court fee unattended despite multiple opportunities; liberty reserved to pursue remedies in law, respondents pointing to Section 17 SARFAESI remedy; coram: B M Shyam Prasad, J.; decided 01.09.2025.

What did the court decide?

If office objections, especially the objection as regards payment of Court fee, remain unattended despite multiple opportunities, the petition must be dismissed. ¶44

Mr. Harishchandra Acharya Vs Canara Bank. — Banking and Recovery | Karnataka HC (2025)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2025:KHC:34125 WP No. 10802 of 2025

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶5

DATED THIS THE 1^ST DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025

¶6

BEFORE

¶7

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO. 10802 OF 2025 (GM-RES) BETWEEN:

¶8

MR. HARISHCHANDRA ACHARYA

¶9

S/O. K. VITTALA ACHARYA,

¶10

AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS,

¶11

BARYA VILLAGE AND POST,

BELTHANGADY TALUK,

DK-574241.

…PETITIONER

Digitally signed by VANAMALA N Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶16

(BY SRI. ABDUL ANSAR P.,ADVOCATE)

¶17

AND:

¶18

CANARA BANK.,

¶19

REGIONAL OFFICE,

¶20

REP BY AUTHORIZED OFFICER,

¶21

SAI INTERNATIONAL BUILDING,

¶22

NE PUTTUR,DK-574201

¶23

¶24

NC: 2025:KHC:34125 WP No. 10802 of 2025

¶25

HC-KAR

¶26

2. THE BRANCH MANAGER

¶27

REP BY BRANCH MANAGER

¶28

UPPINANGADY

¶29

PUTTUR TALUK-DK-574241

¶30

…RESPONDENTS

¶31

(BY SRI. VIGNESH S SHETTY, ADVOCATE)

¶32

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE POSSESSION NOTICE DATED 16/12/2024 BY RESPONDENT BANK VIDE ANNX-A; DIRECT THE RESPONDENT BANK TO REGULARIZE THE LOAN IN QUESTION BY PERMITTING THE PETITIONER TO PAY THE DUE AMOUNT OF LOAN AS ON THE DATE OF THIS PETITION.

¶33

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

¶34

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD

¶35

3 - NC: 2025:KHC:34125 WP No. 10802 of 2025

¶36

HC-KAR

¶37

ORAL ORDER

¶38

The petitioner is a borrower and is aggrieved by the decision to initiate proceedings under the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 [for short, ' SARFAESI Act' ]. The respondent - Bank has issued possession notice dated 16.12.2024 [ Annexure - A ]. This Court on 22.04.2025, has granted interim order staying proceedings pursuant to the possession notice, subject to deposit 20% of the amount in due within eight weeks.

¶39

The office has listed this petition today because the office objections have not been attended to and it is pointed out that one of the office objections is nonpayment of Court fee. Mr. Vignesh S. Shetty, the learned counsel for the respondents when queried, states that the petitioner has complied with the terms of the impugned order asserting that if the petitioner has any grievance with the possession notice, he

¶40

¶41

NC: 2025:KHC:34125 WP No. 10802 of 2025

¶42

HC-KAR

¶43

must necessarily avail remedy under Section 17 of the SARFAESI Act.

¶44

None appeared for the petitioner on the previous occasion and none appears for the petitioner even today. If the office objections are not attended, especially the office objection as regards the payment of Court fee remains unattended to despite multiple opportunities, the petition must be dismissed, and the petition must be disposed of but observing that this disposal shall not preclude the petitioner from availing any remedy that may otherwise be in law.

¶45

The petition stands disposed of accordingly.

¶46

SD/(B M SHYAM PRASAD) JUDGE

¶47

Mr. Harishchandra Acharya v. Canara Bank.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mr. Harishchandra Acharya v. Canara Bank.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sri S S Gangadhar Vs the State of Karnataka

K. M. Jayarama Reddy Vs the State of Karnataka

Spoorthy Integrated Solutions (I) Private Limited Vs the State of Karnataka

Smt Manjula Jeevan Kishore Vs the Authorised Officer

Equinox Investors and Agents Welfare Association Vs the Special Officer and Competent Authority

M/S Siddhartha Corrugated Carton Box Industries Vs the Branch Manager Union Bank of India