Dismissed¶59

Mr. Doraiswamy Reddy v. the Authorised Officer/ Manager

Karnataka HC25 Mar 2026WP/35402/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Search terms: writ petition dismissed as infructuous; OTS settlement; one-time settlement; loan account closed; sale notice dated 07.11.2025; Annexure 'E'; City Union Bank Ltd authorised officer; GM-DRT; Articles 226 and 227 certiorari; pending interim applications closed; Lalitha Kanneganti; NC: 2026:KHC:16900. Useful where a challenge to a sale/enforcement notice is rendered moot by an OTS closure of the loan account, or where a petition is disposed of on a bank counsel's submission with the petitioner's counsel absent.

What did the court decide?

Since the loan account has been closed following payment of the entire amount under an OTS settlement, nothing survives for consideration in the writ petition. ¶59

Mr. Doraiswamy Reddy Vs the Authorised Officer/… — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2026)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2026:KHC:16900 WP No. 35402 of 2025

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶5

DATED THIS THE 25^TH DAY OF MARCH, 2026

¶6

BEFORE

¶7

THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI

¶8

WRIT PETITION NO. 35402 OF 2025 (GM-DRT)

¶9

BETWEEN:

¶10

MR. DORAISWAMY REDDY S/O.LATE.G.SUBRAMANYA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.25, CHINNAPPANAIDU LAYOUT, BEHIND DEVEGOWDA PETROL BUNK, BANASHANKARI 3^RD STAGE, BANGALORD-560 042.

¶11

…PETITIONER

¶12

(BY SRI. SHARATH KUMAR SHETTY, ADVOCATE- ABSENT)

¶13

AND:

¶14

Digitally signed by SUVARNA T Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶15

THE AUTHORISED OFFICER/ MANAGER CITY UNION BANK LTD, NO.24-B, GANDHINAGAR, ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE, KUMBAKONAM, TAMILNADU-612 001

¶16

MR.K.MOHAN, S/O.KARUPANNA GOUNDER, AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.14, 2^ND CROSS, CHOWDAIAH BLOCK, SIVAN CHETTY GARDENS, R.T.NAGAR, BANGALORE-560 042

¶17

MR.S.J.MRS.VIJAYAKUMARI, W/O.DORAISWAMY REDDY

¶18

2 - NC: 2026:KHC:16900 WP No. 35402 of 2025

¶19

HC-KAR

¶20

AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.25, BEHIND DEVEGOWDA PETROL BUNK, CHINNAPA NAIDU LAYOUT, BANASHANKARI 3^RD STAGE, BANGALORE-560 042

¶21

MRS.TAMILARASI, W/O.K.MOHAN, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.14, 2^ND CROSS, CHOWDAIAH BLOCK, SIVAN CHETTY GARDENS, R.T.NAGAR, BANGALORE-560 042

¶22

MR.K.KAVEEN KUMAR, S/O.K.MOHAN, AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.14, 2^ND CROSS, CHOWDAIAH BLOCK, SIVAN CHETTY GARDENS, R.T.NAGAR, BANGALORE-560 042

¶23

MR.K.SURYA, S/O.K.MOHAN, AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.14, 2^ND CROSS, CHOWDAIAH BLOCK SIVAN CHETTY GARDENS, R.T.NAGAR, BANGALORE-560 042

¶24

M/S.JALSA NO.25/7, DODDANEKUNDI, K.R.PURAM, BANGALORE-560 037 REPRESENTED BY ITS PARTNERS REG. UNDER INDIAN PARTNERSHIP ACT

¶25

MRS.JYOTHI, W/O.GANDADHARA REDDY,

¶26

3 - NC: 2026:KHC:16900 WP No. 35402 of 2025

¶27

HC-KAR

¶28

MAJOR BY AGE, NO.6, GANAJOTHI NILAYAM, MALLIGE THOTTA, CHOLURPALYA, BANGALORE-560 026

¶29

MRS.RUPA, D/O.GANGADHARA REDDY, MAJOR BY AGE, NO.6, GANGAJOTHI NILAYAM, MALLIGE THOTTA, CHOLARAPALYA, BANGALORE-560 026

¶30

MRS.KAVITHA, MAJOR BY AGE, D/O.GANGADHARA REDDY, NO.6, GANGAJOTHI NILAYAM, MALLIGE THOTTA, CHOLURPALYA, BANGALORE-560 026

¶31

MR.DILIP REDDY, D/O.GANGADHARA REDDY, MAJOR BY AGE, NO.6, GANGAJOTHI NILAYAM, MALLIGE THOTTA, CHOLURPALYA, BANGALORE-560 026

¶32

M/S SEVEN HELLS ENTERPRISES, NO. 257, DODDANAKUDI VILLAGE, BANGALORE- 560 037

¶33

LOKESHWARA REDDY, S/O GANGADHARA REDDY, NO. 6, GANGAJOTHI NILAYAM, MALLIGE THOTTA, CHOLURPALYA, BANGALORE-560 026

¶34

…RESPONDENTS

¶35

(BY SRI.VINAYSWAMY, ADVOCATE FOR R1)

¶36

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED SALE NOTICE DATED 07.11.2025 BEARING NO.

¶37

4 - NC: 2026:KHC:16900 WP No. 35402 of 2025

¶38

HC-KAR

¶39

CO/REX/NPA/2025-26, ISSUED BY THE R1 AS PER ANNEXUREE. IN SO FAR AS PER PETITIONER IS CONCERNED.

¶40

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

¶41

CORAM: HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI

¶42

ORAL ORDER

¶43

There is no representation on behalf of the petitioner.

¶44

The present writ petition is filed seeking the following

¶45

prayer:

¶46

"Wherefore it is respectfully prayed that this Honourable Court may be pleased

¶47

a) To issue a writ in the nature of Certiorari and quash the impugned Sale Notice dated 07.11.2025 bearing No.C.O/REC/NPA/2025-26 issued by the 1^st respondent as per Annexure "E" insofar as petitioner is concerned.

¶48

b) To direct the competent authority/department to conduct the enquiry over the fraudulent transaction over the loan account.

¶49

c) Be pleased to referred the entire petitioner's loan statement of account to approved Chartered Accounted for proper inquiry.

¶50

d) To direct the respondent No.1 not to disturb the petitioner's peaceful possession.

¶51

e) To direct the respondent No.1 to release the documents of item No.1 and 2 infavour of petitioner.

¶52

¶53

NC: 2026:KHC:16900 WP No. 35402 of 2025

¶54

HC-KAR

¶55

f) To issue such other writ, direction or order as this Hon'ble Court deem proper in the circumstances of the case.

¶56

g) to award to the petitioner, the costs of this petition."

¶57

Sri. C Vinay Swamy, learned counsel submits that

¶58

he has instruction to file vakalat on behalf of respondent No.1. It is submitted that the entire loan amount is paid through OTS. Hence, nothing survives for consideration in this writ petition.

¶59

Considering the fact that already under OTS, the account is closed, nothing survives for consideration. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed as infructuous .

¶60

All pending I.As., in the writ petition shall stand

¶61

closed.

¶62

SD/(LALITHA KANNEGANTI) JUDGE

¶63

PKN

¶64

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 9

Mr. Doraiswamy Reddy v. the Authorised Officer/ Manager

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mr. Doraiswamy Reddy v. the Authorised Officer/ Manager

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

Mr. v. S. Sitaram Vs Innovative Foods Limited

Rajith Rudra T P G Vs Sri Seetharaghava Souharda

Sri B Sricharan Vs the Authorized Officer

Smt Shridevi Vs Sammaan Finserve Limited

Sri v Krishnamurthy Vs the Swarna Bharathi Sahakara Bank Niyamitha

Mr M C Ashok Vs M/S Hdfc Bank