Karnataka High Court
Sri.G . Raghavendra vs Pragathi Krishna Gramin Bank on 17 February, 2018
Author: A.S.Bopanna
Bench: A.S. Bopanna
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2018
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.S. BOPANNA
WRIT PETITION NO.55729/2017 (GM-RES)
BETWEEN:
SRI.G.RAGHAVENDRA
S/O. LATE B.GURUMURTHY
AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS
R/A NEW BHOVI COLONY
NEAR WATER TANK
GOPALAPUR ROAD
CHITRADURGA TOWN - 577 501 ...PETITIONER
(BY SRI.KALLESHAPA.K.S., ADV.)
AND:
1. PRAGATHI KRISHNA GRAMIN BANK
AT B.D.ROAD, CHITRADURGA - 577 520
REPRESENTED BY ITS SENIOR MANAGER
SRI.UMESH.V.VAGLE
2. THE AUTHORIZED OFFICER
PRAGATHI KRISHNA GRAMIN BANK
REGIONAL OFFICE
CHITRADURGA - 577 520 ...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI T.P.MUTHANNA, ADV. FOR R2
R1 SERVED)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226
AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO
QUASH ANNEX-E DATED 21.11.2017 ISSUED BY R1-BANK
AND DIRECT R1-BANK TO SETTLE THE DUES OF THE
PETITIONER UNDER TH RBI OTS SCHEME.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS
DAY, THE COURT PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
2
ORDER
Though the condition imposed through the interim order dated 14.12.2017 has not been complied, learned counsel for respondent No.2 would submit that a sale process impugned in this petition has not taken place. If that be the position, the only issue that arises for consideration is with regard to OTS proposal that has been put forth by the petitioner to the respondents.
2. Since, as already noted, sale has not taken place and if the OTS proposal as put forth by the petitioner has been considered and declined, if a fresh proposal is put to the respondent-Bank, a consideration in that regard shall be made by the respondent and only if the same does not become acceptable, any further action in that regard shall be taken thereafter. Hence, no further orders are required in this petition.
The petition is disposed of accordingly.
Sd/-
JUDGE VM