Smt Beenashree Vs Canara Bank

CANARA BANK KULVANAHALLI BRNCH MANDAL PANCHAYATH BUILDING KULUVANAHLLI NELAMANGASLA TALUK BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT BENGALURU 562111 REP BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER SRI RAGHAVENDRA KUMAR.

¶23

CANARA BANK KALAGHATTA BRANCH NO 26A, JANGAMAKOTE CROSS SHIDLAGHATTA TALUK CHIKKABALLAPURA DISTGRICT REP BY ITS BRANCH MANAGBER SMT CHANDRAPRABHA S.

¶24

THE RECOVERY OFFICEER 1 DEBT RECOVERY TRIBUNAL 2 BSNL BUILDNG (FOURTH FLOOR) TELEPHONE HOUSE RAJ BHAWAN ROAD BENGALURU 560001.

¶25

SRI PAPAIAH S/O LATE HANUMAIAH AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS

¶26

VINOD BABU P S/O SRI PAPAIAH AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS

¶27

3 -

¶28

NC: 2025:KHC:35185 WP No. 12322 of 2024

¶29

HC-KAR

¶30

RESPONDENT NOS.3 & 4 ARE R/AT ARALASANDRA MADALAKOTE POST NELAMANGALA TALUK BENGALURU - 562 123.

¶31

…RESPONDENTS

¶32

(BY SRI. VIGNESH S. SHETTY.,ADVOCATE FOR R1 AND R2)

¶33

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH OR SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED WARRANT OF ATTACHMENT OF IMMOVABLE PROPERTY DATED 12.03.2024 ISSUED BY R-3 (ANNEXURE-D) IN RC NO. 47/2022 IS OA NO. 972/2019 AND NOTICE FOR SETTLING SALE PROCLAMATION DATED 12.03.2024 ISSUED BY R-3 (ANNEXURE-E) IN RC NO. 47/2022 IS OA NO. 972/2019.

¶34

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

¶35

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

¶36

4 -

¶37

NC: 2025:KHC:35185 WP No. 12322 of 2024

¶38

HC-KAR

¶39

ORAL ORDER

¶40

The petitioners are the borrowers, and they are arrayed as the respondents by the Bank [ the first and second respondents ] in the proceedings in O.A.No.972/2019 on the file of the Debts Recovery Tribunal - II, Bengaluru [ for short, 'the DRT' ]. The DRT, by its order dated 23.12.2024 [ Annexure-B ], has allowed this application with direction for issuance of

¶41

a Recovery Certificate for a sum of Rs.78,21,900/together with interest and costs. The petitioners have invoked the DRT’s jurisdiction under Section 22 (2)(H) of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 [for short, ' the Act '] for recall of this order, and in the interregnum, the Recovery Officer - I attached to the DRT has issued the impugned attachment warrant and sale proclamation.

¶42

This Court, on 06.03.2025, has granted the

¶43

interim order requiring the petitioners to deposit a sum of Rs.20,00,000/- within a time frame, and the

¶44

5 -

¶45

NC: 2025:KHC:35185 WP No. 12322 of 2024

¶46

HC-KAR

¶47

petitioners have deposited this amount but belatedly. This Court next has granted another interim order on 06.03.2025 stipulating that a further sum of Rs.20,00,000/- must be deposited before 08.04.2025, and because the petitioners had defaulted, this Court on 29.04.2025 has vacated the interim order with liberty to the petitioners to seek restoration of such order.

¶48

Mr. Prashanth U.T., the learned counsel for the petitioners, submits that the petitioners have presently complied with the terms of the afore order and that the petitioner’s application under Section 22 (2)(H) of the DRT Act is still pending consideration. Mr. Vignesh S Shetty, the learned counsel for the Bank, is heard in the light of these two submissions and that no further proceedings are begun though the interim order granted by the Court stands vacated by the order dated 29.04.2025.

¶49

6 -

¶50

NC: 2025:KHC:35185 WP No. 12322 of 2024

¶51

HC-KAR

¶52

The petitioners' case is that the notices of

¶53

the original application are addressed to their earlier addresses and that they are currently living in the addresses as furnished in the present petition. The DRT will have to examine this in the pending application and pass just orders if indeed the petitioners can vindicate their stand, and this Court must opine that there should be no precipitation until this pending application is decided. If the petitioners' application is decided deferring precipitous proceedings, there would be complete adjudication avoiding protraction. Hence, the following:

¶54

ORDER

¶55

[A] The petition is allowed-in-part directing the third respondent [ the Recovery Officer attached to DRT-1 ] to defer coercive measures until the petitioner's application under Section

¶56

7 -

¶57

NC: 2025:KHC:35185 WP No. 12322 of 2024

¶58

HC-KAR

¶59

[B] The respondent - Bank is reserved with liberty to file a certified copy of this order in the pending application for early disposal.

¶60

SD/(B M SHYAM PRASAD) JUDGE

¶61

SA ct:sr

Smt Beenashree v. Canara Bank

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt Beenashree v. Canara Bank

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sri Nanjundeshwara Education Society Vs M/S Protium Finance Limited

M/S Bethal Education Trust (R) Vs M/S the Karnataka State Co-Operative Apex Bank Ltd.

Sri Dr Suresh Babu Vs State of Karnataka

Mrs Gayathri Vs the Administrator

Sri. Girish S Vs the State of Karnataka

Smt. Kavitha Srinath Venkatappa Vs the Union of India