IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE WRIT PETITION NO.29023 OF 2018 (GM-RES) BETWEEN:
SRI. VIJAY KUMAR R AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS RESIDING AT NO.101 (OLD NO.66), 18TH MAIN, J.C.NAGAR MAHALAKSHMIPURAM POST KURUBURAHALLI, NEAR ICICI BANK ATM BENGALURU-560086.
… PETITIONER (By Mr. HANUMANTHAPPA B. HARAVIGOUDAR, ADV., FOR Mr. N. SURESHA, ADV.,) AND:
1. M/S. AXIS BANK LTD NO.45, PRESTIGE LIBRA IST FLOOR, ABOVE PASSPORT SEVA KENDRA LALBAGH ROAD, BENGALURU-560027 REP. BY HIS AUTHORIZED OFFICER.
2. MRS. KAVITHA S W/O VIJAY KUMAR R RESIDING AT NO.101 (OLD NO.66) 18TH MAIN J.C.NAGAR, MAHALAKSHMIPURAM POST KURUBARAHALLI, NEAR ICICI BANK ATM BENGALURU-560086.
… RESPONDENTS (By Mr. UNNIKRISHNA N, ADV., FOR R1 R2 SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENT BANK TO REGULARIZE THE LOAN ACCOUNT AS PER ANNEXURE-B. TO AWARD THE COSTS OF THIS PETITION. GRANT AN INTERIM ORDER TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENT BANK NOT TO TAKE THE PHYSICAL POSSESSION OF THE PETITION SCHEDULE PROPERTY. IF THEY PROCEED FURTHER, THE LOSS AND HARDSHIP CAUSED TO THE PETITIONER CANNOT BE COMPENSATED IN TERMS OF MONEY.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-
ORDER Mr.Hanumanthappa B. Haravigoudar for Mr.N.Suresha learned counsel for the petitioner.
Mr.UnniKrishana N., learned counsel for the respondent No.1.
2. The writ petition is admitted for hearing.
With consent of the parties, the same is heard finally.
3. In this petition, the petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs:
a) Issue a writ of mandamus directing the respondent Bank to regularize the loan account as per Annexure-B.
b) To award the costs of this petition.
c) To pass such other order or orders, as this Hon’ble Court deems fit to grant in the circumstances of the case in the interest of justice and equity.
4. When the matter was taken up today, learned counsel for the petitioner has invited the attention of this Court to the representation dated 10.06.2018 and has submitted that the competent authority of the Bank be directed to decide their representation submitted by the petitioner by a speaking order. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondents bank fairly submitted that the representation filed by the petitioner shall be dealt in accordance with law.
5. In view of the aforesaid submission and in the facts of the case the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the competent authority of the respondent-Bank to decide their representation submitted by the by the petitioner by a speaking order within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of the certified copy of the order passed today.
6. In addition, it is open for the petitioner to submit an offer to the respondent Bank under the One Time Settlement Scheme. Needless to state that in case such a offer is submitted, the respondent bank shall consider the same in accordance with law by a speaking order within a period of three weeks from the date of receipt of such offer.
Accordingly, petition is disposed of.
Sd/- JUDGE SS