Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 2, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

M/S Manleo Foods Private Limited vs Canara Bank on 13 January, 2025

Author: R Devdas

Bench: R Devdas

                                            -1-
                                                         NC: 2025:KHC:1230
                                                     WP No. 34429 of 2024




                IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

                     DATED THIS THE 13TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2025

                                         BEFORE
                         THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R DEVDAS
                     WRIT PETITION NO. 34429 OF 2024 (GM-RES)

                BETWEEN:

                1.   M/S. MANLEO FOODS PRIVATE LIMITED
                     REP. BY MR.G.SHUBHA KUMAR
                     C/O. GAANESHWARA M.S.
                     AGED AROUND 35 YEARS,
                     NO.462, 11TH A CROSS,
                     7TH A MAIN ROAD, SECTOR A,
                     YELAHANKA NEW TOWN,
                     YELAHANKA, BANGALORE 560 064

                2.   MR. SRIDHAR BABU K.S.
                     S/O SRINIVASA SHETTY K.S.
                     AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS
                     PARTNER, M/S. SAPTHAGIRI AGRO INDUSTRY
                     R/A SAPTHAGIRI NILAYA, 4TH CROSS
                     NEAR WATER TANK
Digitally signed by  VIDYANAGAR, TUMKUR-572101.
DHARMALINGAM
                                                          ...PETITIONERS
Location: HIGH
COURT OF            (BY SMT. RAJALAKSHMI V S & SRI. V. MOHAN., ADVOCATES)
KARNATAKA

                AND:

                CANARA BANK
                ARM BRANCH-I, 2ND FLOOR,
                SPENCER TOWER, M.G.ROAD,
                BANGALORE-560 001
                REP BY AUTHORISED OFFICER/CHIEF MANAGER
                                                             ...RESPONDENT
                (BY SRI. VIGNESH SHETTY., ADVOCATE)
                                -2-
                                              NC: 2025:KHC:1230
                                          WP No. 34429 of 2024




     THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE
CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE AUCTION
SALE NOTICE DTD. 26.11.2024 IN RESPECT OF THE SCHEDULE
PROPERTIES (ANNX-A) PROPOSING TO CONDUCT THE
AUCTION SALE ON 18.12.2024 IN RESPECT OF THE SCHEDULE
PROPERTIES / RICE MILL PLANT AND MACHINERY AS
(SL.NO.2) AND ETC.

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

CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R DEVDAS

                      ORAL ORDER

The 2nd petitioner, who was in fact arrayed as 2nd respondent earlier was thereafter transposed as the 2nd petitioner in this petition. The 2nd petitioner is the borrower at the hands of the 1st respondent-Bank. The prayer in this writ petition is to quash the Auction Sale Notice dated 26.11.2024; to direct the 1st respondent- Bank to restrain from conducting auction sale of the schedule property/Rice Mill units until refund of the petitioners deposit amount transferred to No-lien Account; etc.

2. Learned Counsel for the 1st respondent-Bank submits that the auction sale could not be conducted in -3- NC: 2025:KHC:1230 WP No. 34429 of 2024 terms of the Auction Sale Notice dated 26.11.2024. If it is the request of the petitioners now to refund the amount deposited on behalf of the petitioners under One Time Settlement (OTS) scheme, then, this Court could dispose of the writ petition while issuing such a direction to the respondent-Bank to consider the request made by the petitioners for refund of the amount deposited under the OTS scheme.

3. Having regard to the interim orders passed on 19.1.2024 and in view of the prayer made in the writ petition regarding the Auction Sale Notice dated 26.11.2024 and the fact that the auction could not be held by the respondent-Bank, the writ petition stands disposed of directing the 1st respondent-Bank to consider the request made by the petitioners for refund of the amount deposited by the petitioners under OTS scheme.

4. If the said amount is kept under No-lien Account and the petitioners have not fulfilled the conditions the 1st respondent-Bank will be duty bound to consider the -4- NC: 2025:KHC:1230 WP No. 34429 of 2024 representation given by the petitioners which includes the 2nd petitioner, who is the original borrower for refund of the amount deposited under OTS scheme. The same shall be considered as expeditiously as possible and at any rate within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

Ordered accordingly.

Sd/-

(R DEVDAS) JUDGE DL CT: JL