Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Karnataka
  4. /
  5. 2017
  6. /
  7. January

M/S Shree Cashews vs Bharath Co Operative Bank Mumbai Ltd

High Court Of Karnataka|14 December, 2017
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 14TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2017 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE A.S.BOPANNA WRIT PETITION No.47417/2017 (GM – RES) BETWEEN:
M/s. Shree Cashews, A Partnership Firm, Situated Sy.No.122/A, Betkuli, Kumta Taluk, Karwar District – 581 33, Represented by its Managing Partner, Mr. Gururaja Mahabala Shetty, S/o. Mahabala Shetty, Aged about 37 years, Door No.2 – 4, Premashraya Village Ganthihole, Bijoor Post, Kundapura Taluk, Udupi – 576 224. (By Sri. Sachin B.S., Advocate) AND:
Bharath Co-operative Bank (Mumbai) Ltd., Udupi Branch, Vasuki Tower, Next to Vishwas Commercial Building, Near Taluk Office, Opp. District Court, Udupi – 576 101, …Petitioner Represented by Deputy General Manager and Authorized officer …Respondent (By Sri.Pundikai Ishwara Bhat, Advocate) This Writ Petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, praying to direct the respondent to consider the representation as per Annexure – C given by the petitioner and to pass an order in accordance with law and etc.
This Writ Petition coming on for Orders this day, the Court made the following:-
O R D E R The condition imposed through the interim order has not been complied by the petitioner. In that view, the interim order, in any event has not come into effect. Be that as it may, the petitioner is before this Court seeking issue of mandamus to consider the representation dated 17.10.2017 as per Annexure – C.
2. The statement of objections filed by the respondent would disclose that the contentions raised by the petitioner is replied through Annexure – R1 dated 02.11.2017. If that be the position, the prayer No.1 in this petition does not survive for consideration. In so far as prayer No.2 with regard to dispossession, at this point in time no order to the detriment of the petitioner is available in that regard and is assailed so as to entertain this petition. However, in future any action is taken against the petitioner, the petitioner would have the liberty to avail the remedy as available to the petitioner in law.
With such liberty to the petitioner, the petition stands disposed of accordingly.
Sd/- JUDGE UN
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

M/S Shree Cashews vs Bharath Co Operative Bank Mumbai Ltd

Court

High Court Of Karnataka

JudgmentDate
14 December, 2017
Judges
  • A S Bopanna