IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 26TH DAY OF MARCH 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE WRIT PETITION NO.3044 OF 2015 (GM-RES) BETWEEN:
MR.SUDHIR BEDIGUTHU S/O SRI RAMAIH GOWDA AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS R/AT NO.93, PRAKRUTHI ROYAL HERMITAGE GOTTIGERE VILLAGE, BANNERGATTA ROAD BANGALORE-560 083 (BY MR.KARUNAKAR.P., ADV.) AND:
1. M/S.CITIBANK N.A.
NO.91, PRESTIGE SOUTHEND 2ND FLOOR SOUTHEND ROAD, JAYANAGAR BANGALORE-560 004 … PETITIONER REP. BY THE AUTHORISED OFFICER/CHIEF MANAGER 2. M/S.BIRLA SUN LIFE INSURANCE REGD. OFFICE: ONE INDIABULLS CENTRE TOWR-1, 16TH FLOOR, JIPITER MILL COMPOUND 841, SENAPATI BAPAT MARG, ELIPHINSTONE ROAD MUMBAI-400 013 REP. BY THE MANAGING DIRECTOR … RESPONDENTS (BY MR.MAHABALESHWARA GANAPATHI, ADV. FOR R-1 MR.H.N.KESHAVA PRASHANTH, ADV. FOR R-2) - - -
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO DIRECT THE R-1 TO CONSIDER THE REPRESENTATION DTD: 08.01.2015 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW VIDE ANNEXURE-L AND ETC.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDER THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-
ORDER Mr.Karunakar P., learned counsel for the petitioner.
Mr.Mahabaleshwara Ganapathi, learned counsel for the respondent No.1.
Mr.H.N.Keshava Prashanth, learned counsel for respondent No.2.
2. The writ petition is admitted for hearing.
With consent of learned counsel for the parties, the same is heard finally.
3. When the matter was taken up today, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the representation for settlement of the loan account under the ‘One Time Settlement’ Scheme submitted by the petitioner may be considered. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent fairly submitted that in case such a representation is not already decided, the same shall be dealt with in accordance with law.
5. In view of the submissions made and in the facts of the case, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction that the representation under ‘One Time Settlement’ scheme submitted by the petitioner may be decided by the competent authority if not already decided within four weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of the order passed today. It is made clear that this court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case.
Till the representation submitted by the petitioner is decided, ad-interim order dated 29.12.2014 shall continue.
Accordingly, the petition is disposed of.
Sd/- JUDGE SS