Karnataka High Court
Sri T.A. Rajesh vs M/S. Kotak Mahindra Bank on 16 November, 2018
Equivalent citations: AIRONLINE 2018 KAR 1050
Author: B.Veerappa
Bench: B.Veerappa
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 16th DAY OF NOVEMBER 2018
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE Mr. JUSTICE B.VEERAPPA
WRIT PETITION NO.9767 OF 2014 (GM-RES)
&
WRIT PETITION NOs.10054-10056 OF 2014 (GM-RES)
Between:
1. Sri.T.A.Rajesh,
Age 43 years,
S/o Anantharama Setty,
R/a Lakshmi Ranganatha Nilaya,
No.671, 1st Floor,
4th Cross, Mahalakshmi Layout,
Bengaluru.
2. Sri.T.A.Yogesh,
Age 40 years,
S/o Anantharama Setty,
R/a Lakshmi Ranganatha Nilaya,
No.671, 1st Floor,
4th Cross, Mahalakshmi Layout,
Bengaluru.
3. Sri.T.R.Nagalakshmi,
Age 39 years,
W/o.T.A.Rajesh,
R/a Lakshmi Ranganatha Nilaya,
No.671, 1st Floor,
4th Cross, Mahalakshmi Layout,
Bengaluru.
4. Sri.T.Y.Archana,
Age 35 years,
2
W/o.T.A. Yogesh,
R/a Lakshmi Ranganatha Nilaya,
No.671, 1st Floor,
4th Cross, Mahalakshmi Layout,
Bengaluru. ... Petitioners
(By Sri.D.Prabhakar, Advocate)
And:
1. M/s.Kotak Mahindra Bank,
No.59, Sree Complex,
BHSC T Block,
Banashankari 3rd Stage,
Bengaluru-560085,
Represented by its
Branch Manager.
2. M/s. Bank of India,
V.V.Puram Brach,
Diagonal Road,
V.V.Puram,
Bengaluru-560004,
Represented by its
Branch Manager. ... Respondents
(By Smt.Sreedevi, Advocate for
Sri.Jai Patil, Advocate for R1
Sri.M.Mohamed Ibrahim, Advocate for R2)
These Writ Petitions are filed under Articles 226 and
227 of the Constitution of India praying to quash the public
notice published in Kannada Prabha daily newspaper dated
30.12.2013, vide Annexure-A issued by the first respondent
in so far as it relates to item No.7 of the property belonging
to the petitioners and etc.
These Writ Petitions coming on for Orders, this day,
the Court made the following:-
3
ORDER
The petitioner has filed these writ petitions with the following prayers:
a) Issue a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction quashing the Public Notice published in Kannada Prabha daily Newspaper dated 30.12.2013, vide Annexure-A, issued by the first respondent in so far as it relates to item No.7 of the property belonging to the petitioners;
b) Issue a writ or order directing the respondent to pay liquidated damages of Rs.10,00,000/-
(Rupees Ten Lakhs only) by way of compensation to the petitioners for wrongful action of the first respondent.
c) Issue such other writ, order or direction as may be deemed fit in the circumstances of the case, and award costs in the interest of justice and equity.
2. Learned counsel for 1st respondent-Bank has filed a memo for dismissal dated 13.11.2018 which reads as under:
"Memo for dismissal of Writ Petition The 1st Respondent in the above matter humbly submits that the Petitioner in the above matter has challenged the possession notice issued by the 1st Respondent herein dated 30/12/2013 (Annexure-A to the writ petition) and since the 2nd Respondent herein 4 had sold the property to the Petitioner herein by Auction and filed S.A.612/2012 seeking to set aside the tender-cum-auction sale dated 12/11/2010 in the above said matter, the Hon'ble Debt Recovery Tribunal directed the 2nd Respondent Bank to pay excess sale proceeds of Schedule property lying with them to the 1st Respondent-Bank and the same has been paid by the 2nd Respondent-Bank to the 1st Respondent-Bank and the 1st Respondent-Bank submits that there after the possession notice has been withdrawn by the 1st Respondent-Bank and nothing survives for consideration in the above writ petition. Hence it is prayed that this Hon'ble Court be pleased to dismiss the above writ petition as infructuous in the interest of justice and equity."
3. Learned counsel for respondents submits that the 1st respondent-Bank has withdrawn the public notice and the prayer does not survive for consideration.
4. Memo and submission are placed on record.
5. In view of the above, Writ Petitions are dismissed.
Sd/-
JUDGE bnv* ct-rg