Allowed¶38

The Board of Directors and v. Hanumanna M

Karnataka HC22 Jun 2026RP/588/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Karnataka Gramin Bank; Board of Directors and Appellate Authority; review petition RP No.588 of 2024; Order 47 Rule 1 of CPC, 1908; Section 114 of CPC; error apparent on face of record; W.P.No.894 of 2023 (S-RES) restored on file; appeal already considered and rejected by Appellate Authority; Single Judge E.S.Indiresh; High Court of Karnataka; review allowed.

What did the court decide?

Review petition allowed; Writ Petition No.894 of 2023 (S-Res) (Annexure-A) restored on file of this Court. ¶38

The Board of Directors and Vs Hanumanna M — Karnataka HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

¶1

¶2

NC: 2026:KHC:30585 RP No. 588 of 2024

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶5

DATED THIS THE 22^ND DAY OF JUNE, 2026

¶6

BEFORE

¶7

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH REVIEW PETITION NO. 588 OF 2024

¶8

BETWEEN:

¶9

THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS AND APPELLATE AUTHORITY, KARNATAKA GRAMIN BANK, HEAD OFFICE NO.32, P B NO.55, SANGANAKAL ROAD, GANDHINAGAR, BALLARY - 583 103.

¶10

…PETITIONER

¶11

(BY SMT.LAKSHMI S HOLLA, ADVOCATE)

¶12

AND:

¶13

Digitally signed by CHAYA S A Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶14

HANUMANNA M, S/O LATE MUNIVENKATAPPA, AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS, NEAR DUBAI HOUSE, RAVINDRANATH TAGORE ROAD, GAYITHRI EXTENSION, CHANNARAYAPATNA - 573 116, HASSAN DISTRICT.

¶15

…RESPONDENT

¶16

(BY SRI. HANUMANTHAPPA HARAVI., ADVOCATE)

¶17

THIS REVIEW PETITION IS FILED UNDER ORDER 47 RULE 1 OF CPC, 1908 PRAYING TO (I) ALLOW THIS PETITION, (II) REVIEW THE ORDER DATED 06.04.2023 OF THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE IN WP NO.894/2023(S-RES).

¶18

¶19

NC: 2026:KHC:30585 RP No. 588 of 2024

¶20

HC-KAR

¶21

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY,

¶22

ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶23

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH

¶24

ORAL ORDER

¶25

Heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties.

¶26

In this review petition, petitioner is seeking

¶27

review of the order dated 06.04.2023 in W.P.No.894 of 2023 (S-Res) (Annexure-A).

¶28

Smt.Lakshmi.S.Holla, learned counsel

¶29

appearing for the petitioner submitted that, prior to the

¶30

order passed by this Court, directing the Appellate Authority to consider the appeal preferred by the petitioner, the Appellate Authority has already considered the same and rejected the same.

¶31