Skip to content

The research platform for Indian law — judgements, legislation and the citations between them. Free to search, with the original document behind every result.

A product of LawSathi.

Research

Search Legislation Research tools

Browse

Courts Case types Topics Most-cited judgements Sources

LawSathi

Practice platform Blog

© 2026 LawSathiTerms PrivacyResearch aid, not the official record.

M/S Mahalakshmi Rice Mill Vs Canara Bank — Company and Corporate | Karnataka HC (2025)

Home
Karnataka HC
2025
M/S Mahalakshmi Rice Mill Vs Canara BankM/S Mahalakshmi Rice Mill v. Canara Bank

Dismissed¶¶38

M/S Mahalakshmi Rice Mill v. Canara Bank

Karnataka HC20 Aug 2025WP/35788/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

NC: 2025:KHC:32469 | Karnataka HC Bengaluru, Justice B M Shyam Prasad, 20-08-2025: WP 35788/2024 (GM-RES) — Mahalakshmi Rice Mill & K.R. Srilakshmi (borrowers) v. Canara Bank (Basaveshwara Road Branch) & guarantors Ramesh.R and Venkata Rangaiah Shetty — challenge under Articles 226/227 to order dated 01/07/2024 (Cr.Misc.No.18/2024, Prl.Sr.Civil Judge & CJM Chikkaballapur) under S.14 SARFAESI Act — petition dismissed for default (counsel absent; no deposit per interim order dated 31.12.2024); no adjudication of the S.14 order; MSME/RBI-circular representation prayer unaddressed.

What did the court decide?

The Court, perusing the records, dismissed the writ petition for default: none appeared for the petitioners and they had not complied with the interim order dated 31.12.2024 (no amount deposited). No ruling was made on the Section 14 SARFAESI order or the remaining prayers.

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Dismissed

Issue for consideration

Whether the writ petition seeking quashing of the order dated 01/07/2024 passed under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act in Cr. Misc. No. 18/2024 should proceed to adjudication, given that none appeared for the petitioners and they had not complied with the interim order dated 31.12.2024 (no amount deposited). +1 more

Court's answer

The Court, perusing the records, dismissed the writ petition for default: none appeared for the petitioners and they had not complied with the interim order dated 31.12.2024 (no amount deposited). No ruling was made on the Section 14 SARFAESI order or the remaining prayers.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ Petition No. 35788 of 2024 (GM-RES), High Court of Karnataka at Bengaluru (B M Shyam Prasad, J.), decided 20 August 2025 (NC: 2025:KHC:32469): filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution by M/s Mahalakshmi Rice Mill and its proprietrix Smt. K.R. Srilakshmi (borrowers) against Canara Bank (Basaveshwara Road Branch, Bengaluru) and two guarantors, praying to (i) quash and declare illegal the execution of the order dated 01/07/2024 (Ann-A) passed in Cr. Misc. No. 18/2024 by the Prl. Sr. Civil Judge and CJM at Chikkaballapur under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act, (ii) obtain possession of the schedule property, and (iii) have the Bank consider representations following Government policies and RBI circulars for MSME priority sector. Notice to Respondents 2 and 3 had been dispensed with vide order dated 31.12.2024. Coming on for orders, counsel for the petitioners (Sri. V Mohan) was absent and counsel for Respondent 1 (Canara Bank) submitted the petitioners had not complied with the interim order dated 31.12.2024 as no amount was deposited. Perusing the records, the Court dismissed the petition for default. No finding was expressed on the Section 14 order or any other prayer.

A

1 -

NC: 2025:KHC:32469 WP No. 35788 of 2024

HC-KAR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 20^TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2025

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO. 35788 OF 2024 (GM-RES)

BETWEEN:

M/S MAHALAKSHMI RICE MILL NO.107, YAGAVAKOTE VILLAGE, MURUGAMALLA HOBLI, YAGAVAKOTE VILLAGE AND POST, CHINTHAMANI TALUK,-563146. REPRESENTED BY ITS PROPRIETRIX, SMT.K.R.SRILAKSHMI (BORROWER).

Digitally signed by VANAMALA N

Location: High Court of Karnataka

SMT.K.R.SRILAKSHMI AGED AROUND 47 YEARS YAGAVAKOTE VILLAGE, MURUGAMALLA HOBLI YAGAVAKOTE VILLAGE AND POST, CHINTHAMANI TALUK,-563146 (BORROWER).

…PETITIONERS

(BY SRI. V MOHAN.,ADVOCATE (ABSENT))

AND:

CANARA BANK BASAVESHWARA ROAD BRANCH, SONA TOWERS, GROUND FLOOR,

2 -

NC: 2025:KHC:32469 WP No. 35788 of 2024

HC-KAR

BESIDES MANIPAL HOSPITAL, MILLERS ROAD, BENGALURU-560052. REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORIZED OFFICER, SRI. RAJENDRA TRIPATHY (LENDER-BANKING COMPANY UNDER COMPANIES ACT, 1949-LENDER)

SRI. RAMESH.R. AGED AROUND 49 YEARS H.L.NO.196/285 AND 286, YAGAVAKOTE VILLAGE, MURUGAMALLA HOBLI, CHINTHAMANI TALUK 563146 (BORROWER/GUARANTOR).

SRI. VENKATA RANGAIAH SHETTY, S/O. MR.LAKSHMAIAH, AGED AROUND 63 YEARS NO.500, 9^TH CROSS, RAJAJINAGAR, BENGALURU-560010 (GUARANTOR)

…RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI.VIGENSH SHETYY., ADVOCATE FOR C/R1; VIDE ORDER DATED 31.12.2024 NOTICE TO R2 & R3 IS DISPENSED WITH )

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO i) QUASH THE ORDER DATED 01/07/2024 (ANN-A) PASSED IN CR. MISC. 18/2024 PRL.SR.CIVIL JUDGE AND CJM AT CHIKKABALLAPUR U/S 14 OF SARFAESI ACT; ii) TO DECLARE EXECUTION OF ORDER DATED 01/07/2024

3 -

NC: 2025:KHC:32469 WP No. 35788 of 2024

HC-KAR

PASSED IN CR.MISC. NO. 18/2024 PRL.SR.CIVIL JUDGE AND CJM AT CHIKKABALLAPUR U/S 14 OF SARFAESI ACT (ANN-A) BY RESPONDENT BANK AS ILLEGAL AND CONSEQUENTLY GRANT POSSESSION OF THE SCHEDULE PROPERTY TO THE PETITIONER WITHOUT DELAY; iii) TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENT BANK TO CONSIDER THE REPRESENTATION FOLLOWING GOVERNMENT POLICIES AND RBI CIRCULARS EXTENDED TO MSME PRIORITY SECTOR AND SUCH ORDERS.

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS

DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

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

ORAL ORDER

None appears for the petitioners, and Sri Vighnesh S Shetty, the learned counsel for the first respondent, while inviting this Court's attention to the order dated 31.12.2024, submits that the petitioners have not complied with the interim order as no amount is deposited.

4 -

NC: 2025:KHC:32469 WP No. 35788 of 2024

HC-KAR

On perusal of the records, the petition stands

dismissed for default.

Sd/(B M SHYAM PRASAD) JUDGE

NV

Issues for consideration

2 issues framed by the court

AI extract

1.
Whether the writ petition seeking quashing of the order dated 01/07/2024 passed under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act in Cr. Misc. No. 18/2024 should proceed to adjudication, given that none appeared for the petitioners and they had not complied with the interim order dated 31.12.2024 (no amount deposited).¶¶33
The court held
The Court, perusing the records, dismissed the writ petition for default: none appeared for the petitioners and they had not complied with the interim order dated 31.12.2024 (no amount deposited). No ruling was made on the Section 14 SARFAESI order or the remaining prayers.ratio¶¶38
2.
Legality of the execution of the order dated 01/07/2024 (Ann-A) passed in Cr. Misc. No. 18/2024 under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act and consequent grant of possession of the schedule property (prayed for, but not adjudicated in this oral order).medium confidence¶¶24

Statutes considered

3 provisions across 3 enactments

AI extract

Constitution of IndiaArticles 226 and 227¶¶24
SARFAESI ActSection 14¶¶24
Companies Act, 1949COMPANIES ACT, 1949¶¶19

Procedural history

How this case reached the court

AI extract

Order under challenge
Order dated 01/07/2024 (Ann-A) passed in Cr. Misc. No. 18/2024 by the Prl. Sr. Civil Judge and CJM at Chikkaballapur under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act; the petition sought its quashing and declaration that its execution was illegal.¶¶24
PRL.SR.CIVIL JUDGE AND CJM AT CHIKKABALLAPUR · 01/07/2024
Prior proceeding
Notice to Respondents 2 (Sri. Ramesh.R.) and 3 (Sri. Venkata Rangaiah Shetty) dispensed with vide order dated 31.12.2024.¶¶23
Prior proceeding
Under an interim order dated 31.12.2024, counsel for Respondent 1 submitted that the petitioners had not complied as no amount was deposited.¶¶33

Parties & counsel

AI extract

petitioner
M/S MAHALAKSHMI RICE MILL NO.107, YAGAVAKOTE VILLAGE, MURUGAMALLA HOBLI, YAGAVAKOTE VILLAGE AND POST, CHINTHAMANI TALUK,-563146, represented by its Proprietrix, SMT.K.R.SRILAKSHMI (Borrower)¶¶8
Sri. V Mohan
petitioner
SMT.K.R.SRILAKSHMI, AGED AROUND 47 YEARS, YAGAVAKOTE VILLAGE, MURUGAMALLA HOBLI, YAGAVAKOTE VILLAGE AND POST, CHINTHAMANI TALUK,-563146 (Borrower)¶¶11
Sri. V Mohan
respondent
CANARA BANK BASAVESHWARA ROAD BRANCH, SONA TOWERS, GROUND FLOOR, BESIDES MANIPAL HOSPITAL, MILLERS ROAD, BENGALURU-560052, represented by its Authorized Officer, SRI. RAJENDRA TRIPATHY¶¶19
Sri.Vigensh Shetyy
respondent
SRI. RAMESH.R., AGED AROUND 49 YEARS, H.L.NO.196/285 AND 286, YAGAVAKOTE VILLAGE, MURUGAMALLA HOBLI, CHINTHAMANI TALUK 563146 (Borrower/Guarantor)¶¶20
respondent
SRI. VENKATA RANGAIAH SHETTY, S/O. MR.LAKSHMAIAH, AGED AROUND 63 YEARS, NO.500, 9TH CROSS, RAJAJINAGAR, BENGALURU-560010 (Guarantor)¶¶21

Coram

AI extract

B M Shyam Prasadauthor¶¶31

Case details

As recorded by the court registry

Court: Karnataka HC
Decided on: 20 Aug 2025 · August
Registered: 30 Dec 2024
Case no.: WP/35788/2024
CNR: KAHC010761652024
Topic: Company and Corporate
Bench: B M Shyam Prasad
Disposal: DISMISSED
Case type: Writ Petition (GM-RES)

Similar cases

Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court

Finding judgements on the same questions…

More from B M Shyam Prasad

Sri Rajesh G Vs the State of Karnataka
19 Aug 2025
Sri Shivakumar @ Kumara Vs State of Karnataka
19 Aug 2025
All in Arena Sports and Cultural Association Vs State of Karnataka
19 Aug 2025
M/S. Mujtaba Foundation, Vs the Station House Officer
20 Aug 2025
M/S. Seema Caterers, Vs the Union of India
20 Aug 2025
Sri.G. Girish Vs Federal Bank.
20 Aug 2025

Cite this judgement

M/S Mahalakshmi Rice Mill v. Canara Bank, WP/35788/2024 (KA), decided on 20 August 2025.

The High Court of Karnataka publishes no neutral citation for this judgement — cite it by case number and date of decision.

Statutes3

Constitution of IndiaArticles 226 and 227
SARFAESI ActSection 14
Companies Act, 1949COMPANIES ACT, 1949

View all statutes

Procedural history3

Order dated 01/07/2024 (Ann-A) passed in Cr. Misc. No. 18/2024 by the Prl. Sr. Civil Judge and CJM at Chikkaballapur under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act; the petition sought its quashing and declaration that its execution was illegal.PRL.SR.CIVIL JUDGE AND CJM AT CHIKKABALLAPUR · 01/07/2024
Notice to Respondents 2 (Sri. Ramesh.R.) and 3 (Sri. Venkata Rangaiah Shetty) dispensed with vide order dated 31.12.2024.
Under an interim order dated 31.12.2024, counsel for Respondent 1 submitted that the petitioners had not complied as no amount was deposited.

View full history

Bench / Coram

B M Shyam Prasad

Parties & counsel