IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE B.VEERAPPA WRIT PETITION No.50465 OF 2019 (GM-RES) BETWEEN:
MR. RAGHUNATHA S., AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS, S/O. SHAMANNA, R/AT NO.48, 1ST CROSS, HEGGANAHALLI MAIN ROAD, BEHIND GANESH TEMPLE, WARD NO.71, BENGALURU-560091.
(BY SMT: D.KAVITHA, ADVOCATE FOR MS: MAMATHA M., ADVOCATE) ... PETITIONER AND:
THE AUTHORIZED OFFICER, UCO BANK, JAYANAGAR BRANCH, NO.238/35, 9TH MAIN, 3RD BLOCK, BENGALURU-560011.
... RESPONDENT (BY SRI. K.R.PARASHURAM, ADVOCATE) ---
THE WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENT BANK TO CONSIDER THE REPRESENTATION TO REGULARIZE THE ACCOUNT OR CLOSE THE LOAN ACCOUNT BY PAYING ENTIRE LEGALLY DISCHARGEABLE DUES AS STATED IN ANNEXURE-M AND ETC.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-
O R D E R The petitioner in the above writ petition sought for the following prayer:-
1. Issue a writ in the nature of Mandamus directing the respondent-Bank to consider the representation to regularize the account or close the loan account by paying entire legally dischargeable dues as stated in Annexure-M.
2. Pass any other order which the Hon’ble Court may deem fit in the interest of justice.
2. Learned counsel for respondent Bank Sri. K.R. Parashuram has filed a memo alongwith reply to the representation of the petitioner dated 30.10.2019 and in the reply dated 14.11.2019, it is specifically stated as under:-
“You are being informed that the Bank/Authorised Officer have not been vested and conferred with such Authority to held up or defer the legal proceedings under the SARFAESI Act, 2002 without any valid reasons and causes. Since you have been failed to deposit the Overdue amounts in both the Loan accounts in time in spite of your repeated commitments earlier and your loan accounts have been running irregular for long time, it has been very difficult on our part to be convinced regarding your proposed future course of repayment of the Bank’s dues in time. Therefore you have been advised once again to deposit a minimum of Rs.40.00 Lac, Rs.20.00 lac in each of the loan account within 7-10 days from the date of this letter for a valuable consideration of your proposal on our part. We will revert to your proposal only after receiving an amount of Rs.40.00 lac in both the Loan accounts. Otherwise we shall not have any other options but to initiate further suitable legal course of action as deemed fit to recover the Bank’s dues.”
In view of the said reply stated supra, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has paid the said amounts. In view of the subsequent developments, the prayer sought for in this writ petition would not survive for consideration. Accordingly, the petition is disposed of.
Sd/-
JUDGE *mn/-