Dismissed¶44

M/S Dreamers and Doers v. Corporation Bank

Karnataka HC16 Feb 2026WP/6679/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Karnataka HC dismissed writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 seeking quash of DRT-II Bangalore order dated 05.03.2020 making absolute the interim order in I.A.No.622/2020 in O.A. No.64/2020; ground: disposal of main O.A. on 12.01.2026 caused interim order to merge with final order; liberty reserved to challenge final O.A. order; contentions kept open. Parties: Dreamers and Doers / Avinash Rao v. Corporation Bank, Axis Bank Ltd, Bank of India. Neutral citation printed: NC: 2026:KHC:9495.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition dismissed; liberty reserved to the petitioner to avail the appropriate remedy in accordance with law calling in question the order dated 12.01.2026 passed in O.A. No.64/2020; all contentions kept open; all I.As in the petition stand closed. ¶44

M/S Dreamers and Doers Vs Corporation Bank — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶44

Issue for consideration

Whether anything survives for consideration in this writ petition questioning the order dated 05.03.2020 on I.A.No.622/2020 (making the interim order absolute), given the disposal of the main O.A. No.64/2020 on 12.01.2026.

¶42

Court's answer

Since the main O.A. No.64/2020 has been disposed of (on 12.01.2026), the Court would not examine the interim order passed in I.A.No.622/2020 independently, as that interim order stands merged with the final order dated 12.01.2026 passed in O.A. No.64/2020.

¶41

Ratio / Principle

In view of the disposal of the main O.A., nothing survives for consideration in the writ petition; accordingly the writ petition is dismissed, with liberty reserved to the petitioner to call in question the order dated 12.01.2026 passed in O.A. No.64/2020, all contentions kept open, and all I.As in the petition closed.

¶42

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ Petition No. 6679 of 2020 (GM-DRT), High Court of Karnataka (Smt. Justice Lalitha Kanneganti, 16.02.2026): Petitioners (Dreamers and Doers / Avinash Rao) sought a writ of certiorari under Articles 226 and 227 to quash the order dated 05.03.2020 of Debts Recovery Tribunal - II, Karnataka at Bangalore on I.A.No.622/2020 in O.A. No.64/2020, by which the interim order was made absolute, in respect of their Axis Bank Account No.911020023777115 and Bank of India Account No.840030110000132. On counsel's intimation that the main O.A. No.64/2020 had been disposed of on 12.01.2026, the Court held that the interim order in I.A.No.622/2020 stood merged with the final order in the O.A. and would not be examined independently; nothing survived for consideration in the writ petition, which was dismissed, with liberty reserved to challenge the O.A. order dated 12.01.2026, all contentions kept open and all I.As closed.

¶1

¶2

NC: 2026:KHC:9495 WP No. 6679 of 2020

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 16^TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI WRIT PETITION NO. 6679 OF 2020 (GM-DRT)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

M/S. DREAMERS AND DOERS A PROPRIETARY CONCERN HAVING ITS PLACE OF BUSINESS NO.36, PROMENADE ROAD, PULIKESHINAGAR BANGALORE - 560 005 REPRESENTED BY ITS PROPRIETOR MR. AVINASH RAO

¶9

Digitally signed by SUVARNA T Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶10

MR. AVINASH RAO S/O. SRI BINDU RAO WALKER, AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS, PROPRIETOR DREAMERS AND DOERS, NO.36, PROMENADE ROAD, PULIKESHINAGAR, BANGALORE - 560 005

¶11

…PETITIONERS

¶12

(BY SRI. JOSHUA HUDSON SAMUEL, ADVOCATE)

¶13

AND:

¶14

CORPORATION BANK HEAD OFFICE MANGALA DEVI TEMPLE ROAD, MANGALORE - 575 001, KARNATAKA STATE AND

¶15

BRANCH OFFICE NO.21/1, JELLITA TOWERS, 2^ND FLOOR, MISSION ROAD,

¶16

2 - NC: 2026:KHC:9495 WP No. 6679 of 2020

¶17

HC-KAR

¶18

BANGALORE - 560 027 KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS SENIOR MANAGER MR. S. SELVAMUTHUKUMAR

¶19

AXIS BANK LTD NO.276, HAL 2^ND STAGE, 100 FEET ROAD, INDIRANAGAR, BANGALORE - 560 038

¶20

BANK OF INDIA BANGALORE MAIN BRANCH, NO.11, BANK OF INDIA BUILDING K G ROAD, BANGALORE - 560 009

¶21

…RESPONDENTS

¶22

(BY MR. V.B. RAVISHANKAR, ADVOCATE FOR R1; MR. M.MOHAMMED IBRAHIM, ADVOCATE FOR R3; R2 - SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED)

¶23

THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER DTD 05.03.2020 PASSED BY THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-II, KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE ON I.A.NO.622/2020 IN OA NO.64/2020 VIDE ANNX-G, TO THE WRIT PETITION IN SO FAR AS THE PETITIONERS ARE CONCERNED IN RESPECT OF THEIR BANK ACCOUNT NO.911020023777115 AT AXIS BANK AND ACCOUNT NO.840030110000132 AT BANK OF INDIA AND ETC.

¶24

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶25

¶26

NC: 2026:KHC:9495 WP No. 6679 of 2020

¶27

HC-KAR

¶28

CORAM: HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI

¶29

ORAL ORDER

¶30

The present writ petition is filed questioning the following

¶31

prayers:

¶32

“(a) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of a writ of certiorari, quashing the impugned order dated 05.03.2020 passed by the Debts Recovery Tribunal - II, Karnataka at Bangalore on I.A.No.622/2020 in OA No.64/2020 produced at ANNEXURE - G, to the Writ Petition in so far as the Petitioners are concerned in respect of their Bank Account No.911020023777115 at Axis Bank and Account No - 840030110000132 at Bank of India.

¶33

(b)Pass such other or further orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit to grant in the facts and circumstances of the case and in the interests of justice and equity."

¶34

The writ petition is filed calling in question the order dated 05.03.2020 passed by the Debts Recovery Tribunal in I.A No.622/2020. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the respondents that the main O.A. No.64/2020 itself is disposed of on 12.01.2026. By the order dated 05.03.2020, it is made clear that the interim order passed in I.A. No.622/2020 is made

¶35

¶36

NC: 2026:KHC:9495 WP No. 6679 of 2020

¶37

HC-KAR

¶38

absolute. It is therefore submitted that the remedy available to

¶39

the petitioner is to question the order passed in O.A. No.64/2020 and nothing survives for consideration in this writ petition.

¶40

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner seeks time and submits that, the learned Senior Counsel on his behalf would address arguments.

¶41

When O.A. No.64/2020 is disposed of, this Court would not examine the interim order passed in I.A.No.622/2020 independently, as the same stands merged with the final order dated 12.01.2026 passed in O.A. No.64/2020.

¶42