Geetha S N Vs the Managing Director

¶1

1 -

¶2

NC: 2026:KHC:322 WP No. 23475 of 2022

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 6^TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2026

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL WRIT PETITION NO. 23475 OF 2022 (GM-RES)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

GEETHA S N W/O SRI CHANDRAHASA M.B. AGED 41 YEARS, WORKING AS SENIOR ASSISTANT, SHIMOGA DISTRICT CO-OP BANK LTD ANANDAPURA BRANCH, SAGAR TALUK, SHIMOGA DISTRICT AND R/AT : C/O BASAPPA, S/O BHEEMAPPA NAYAKA STREET, KUMSI VILLAGE AND POST, SHIMOGA TALUK, SHIMOGA DISTRICT-577 201.

¶9

…PETITIONER

¶10

(BY SRI. S. KALYAN BASAVARAJ, ADVOCATE)

¶11

AND:

¶12

THE MANAGING DIRECTOR

¶13

SHIMOGA DISTRICT CO OPERATIVE BANK LIMITED HEAD OFFICE BALARAJ URS ROAD,

¶14

SHIMOGA - 577 201.

¶15

Digitally signed by SUMA B N Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶16

THE GENERAL MANAGER SHIMOGA DISTRICT CO OPRATIVE BANK LIMITED, CITY BRANCH B.H.ROAD, SHIMOGA-577 201.

¶17

…RESPONDENTS

¶18

(BY SRI.DAYANAND S. PATIL, ADVOCATE; R2 - SERVED)

¶19

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED NOTICE BEARING NO 649/2022-23 DATED 17.11.2022 ISSUED BY THE R2, PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-A AND ETC.

¶20

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

¶21

2 -

¶22

NC: 2026:KHC:322 WP No. 23475 of 2022

¶23

HC-KAR

¶24

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL

¶25

ORAL ORDER

¶26

The petitioner, who had admittedly availed financial assistance from the Respondent-Bank against the security of her gold ornaments on 18.06.2014 vide loan account numbers 26177 and 26178, is before this court seeking the following reliefs :

¶27

"(a) Issue a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ or order quashing the impugned notice bearing No.649/2022-23 dated 17.11.2022 issued by the 2nd Respondent, produced at Annexure-A;

¶28

(b) Issue a writ of mandamus to consider the request of the Petitioner dated 29.10.2022 to permit the petitioner to clear outstanding dues under the two loan accounts bearing Nos.26177 and 26178, produced at Annexure-D.

¶29

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, the petitioner has been always ready and willing to repay the loan together with the justifiable rate of interest. However, after the petitioner having borrowed the loan, certain criminal proceedings were initiated by the Respondent-Bank upon the allegation of certain persons availing loan by pledging fake Gold

¶30

3 -

¶31

NC: 2026:KHC:322 WP No. 23475 of 2022

¶32

HC-KAR

¶33

and therefore, even when the petitioner was ready and willing to repay the loan pending enquiry, the Bank did not receive the same. For no fault of the petitioner, the Respondent-Bank is imposing interest which the petitioner is not liable to pay. He further submits that, if the period during which criminal proceedings were initiated by the Bank is excluded and the petitioner's account is reassessed, the petitioner is ready and willing to pay the principal amount as well as the justifiable rate of interest as per her representation. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner had indeed given a representation seeking relaxation on the imposition of rate of interest, as per Annexure-D dated 29.10.2022. Therefore, he submits that, without considering the same, the RespondentBank has issued a Final Notice dated 17.11.2022 (Annexure-A) calling upon the petitioner to repay the entire amount, failing which the Bank would sell the Gold pledged by the petitioner and recover the amounts due. He further submits that, the petitioner has also given another representation on 15.12.2025, which also needs to be considered.

¶34

4 -

¶35

NC: 2026:KHC:322 WP No. 23475 of 2022

¶36

HC-KAR

¶37

In response, the learned counsel appearing for the Respondent-Bank, on the other hand, submits that, the petitioner is none other than the employee of the RespondentBank holding Senior Assistant post and the petitioner is very well aware of the entire loan transaction and she cannot plead ignorance. He further submits that the petitioner herself had initiated the proceedings by filing Original Suit before the Civil Court restraining the Bank from taking any action in recovery of Money. However, upon appearance of the Bank, the petitioner gave up the suit and the same has been dismissed for non-prosecution. The representation given by the petitioner has been considered. It is only after consideration of her representation, final notice has been issued. He submitted that, should the petitioner has any grievance, the same may have to be raised in a proceeding initiated under the provisions of the Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act, 1959. Therefore, he submitted the petition itself is not maintainable, liable to be dismissed.

¶38

Heard and perused the records.

¶39

5 -

¶40

NC: 2026:KHC:322 WP No. 23475 of 2022

¶41

HC-KAR

¶42

The fact that the petitioner is an employee of the Respondent-Bank is not in dispute. It is also not in dispute that the petitioner had availed loan against the security of her Gold ornaments. Petitioner is also ready and willing to pay the principal amount and the justifiable rate of interest. The only dispute apparently raised by the petitioner is seeking exclusion of the period for calculation of interest which, according to the petitioner, was consumed in prosecution of criminal proceedings in Crime No.325 of 2014 and later, CC.No.2776 of 2019, which initiated on the premise of certain misappropriation, to which the petitioner cannot be held liable. This aspect of the matter has been denied by the RespondentBank, which is a disputed question of fact and cannot be gone into in the writ petition.

¶43

Nevertheless, since the petitioner is ready and willing to pay the principal amount and the applicable rate of interest and as she has already made a representation as per Annexure-D and subsequent representation dated 15.12.2025, the petition is disposed of relegating the matter to the Respondent-Bank, directing them to consider the aforesaid representations made

¶44