MS. ASHWINI .K v. UNION OF INDIA
Case at a glance
Outcome
Dismissed
petition is dismissed for non-prosecution
Provisions considered
Judgment
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ WRIT PETITION NO.7676 OF 2021 (GM-RES) RAGHAVENDRA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA BETWEEN:
MS. ASHWINI .K DAUGHTER OF SHRI. KUMARESH AGE ABOUT 20 YEARS RESIDING AT NO.8, OTC ROAD NEXT TO SHARADA TALKIES BANGALORE - 560002.
MS. ABHINANDNA DAUGHTER OF SHRI. KUMARESH AGE ABOUT 17 YEARS RESIDING AT NO.8, OTC ROAD NEXT TO SHARADA TALKIES BANGALORE - 560002.
MASTER ARUN KUMAR .J SON OF JAGADISH AGE ABOUT 17 YEARS RESIDING AT NO.8, OTC ROAD NEXT TO SHARADA TALKIES BANGALORE - 560002. THE PETITIONERS NO.2 AND 3 ARE MINORS AND THEY ARE REPRESENTED BY PETITIONER NO.1 BY MAINTAINING AN APPLICATION UNDER ORDER XXXII RULE 1 OF CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE SEEKING LEAVE IN THAT BEHALF. (BY SRI. X.M. JOSEPH, ADV., [ABSENT]) …PETITIONERS - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:15303 WP No. 7676 of 2021 AND:
1. UNION OF INDIA MINISTRY OF LAW AND JUSTICE LEGISLATIVE DEPARTMENT SHASTRI BHAVAN, 4TH FLOOR DR. RAJENDRA PRASAD ROAD NEW DELHI - 110001 BY ITS SECRETARY.
2. THE SOUTH INDIAN BANK LIMITED REGIONAL OFFICE BANGALORE "SIB ARCADE" NO.61, WHEELERS ROAD COX TOWN, BANGALORE - 560005 BY ITS AUTHORIZED OFFICER.
3. SRI. KUMARESH .K S/O LATE T.N. KRISHNAPPA AGE ABOUT 56 YEARS RESIDING AT NO.8, OTC ROAD NEXT TO SHARADA TALKIES BANGALORE - 560002.
SRI. JAGADISH .K S/O LATE T.N. KRISHNAPPA AGE ABOUT 50 YEARS RESIDING AT NO.8, OTC ROAD NEXT TO SHARADA TALKIES BANGALORE - 560002.
M/S. SWARNAMANDIR JEWEL DESIGNER PVT LTD SANTHRUPTHI COMPLEX VIVEKANANDA ROAD TUMKUR - 572101 BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR SRI. KISHORE KUMAR. (BY SMT. ANUPAMA HEGDE, CGSC FOR R1) …RESPONDENTS - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:15303 WP No. 7676 of 2021 IN ANNX-E, INDIA, PRAYING TO THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF ISSUE AN APPROPRIATE WRIT ORDER TO DECLARE SECTION 14 OF SARFAESI ACT, 2002, NOTIFIED THE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA GAZETTE, EXTRA ORDINARY DTD 04.01.2013 ISSUED BY THE MINISTRY OF LAW AND JUSTICE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, THOUGH LEGISLATIVELY COMPETENT AS VIOLATIVE OF ARTICLE 14 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA. ISSUE A CONSEQUENTIAL WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO QUASH ANNX-B BEING THE ORDER DTD 16.01.2020 PASSED BY THE LEARNED I ADDL. CHIEF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE, BANGALORE IN C.MISC.NO.5161/2019 ORDERING GRANT OF ASSISTANCE UNDER SECTION 14 OF THE SECURITISATION AND RECONSTRUCTION OF FINANCIAL ASSETS AND ENFORCEMENT OF SECURITY INTEREST ACT 2002 FOR THE TAKING PHYSICAL POSSESSION OF THE PETITIONER'S PROPERTY MENTIONED IN THE SCHEDULE TO THE WRIT IS ANCESTRAL PROPERTY, PENDING PETITION WHICH DETERMINATION OF SHARES OF PETITIONERS IN OS NO.5433/2020 ON THE FILE OF LEARNED XXXVII ADDL CITY CIVIL JUDGE, BANGALORE & ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ ORAL ORDER
1. The petitioners are before this Court, seeking the following reliefs: "i) Issue an appropriate writ order to declare section 14 of SARFAESI Act, 2002, notified in Annexure-E, the Government of India Gazette, Extra Ordinary dated 04th January 2013 issued by the Ministry of Law and Justice Government of India, though legislatively competent as violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:15303 WP No. 7676 of 2021 Issue a consequential writ of certiorari to ii) quash Annexure-B being the order dated 16.01.2020 passed by the Learned I Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bangalore Crl. Misc. No.5161/2019 ordering grant of assistance under section 14 of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act 2002 for the taking physical possession of the petitioner's property mentioned in the schedule to the writ petition which is ancestral property, pending determination of shares of petitioners in O.S.No.5433/2020 on the files of learned XXXVII Additional City Civil Judge, Bangalore; Issue any other order/direction as deem fit iii) and proper in the circumstances of the present case and to allow this writ petition with costs. "
Operative part
2. Despite the order dated 26.03.2025, none appears for the petitioners today also and process fee has also not been paid. It appears that petitioners are not interested in prosecuting the matter. Hence, the petition is dismissed for non-prosecution. SD/- (SURAJ GOVINDARAJ) JUDGE ABK, List No.: 1 Sl No.: 20
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: petition is dismissed for non-prosecution
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 — O. XXXII r. 1; Constitution of India — arts. 14, 226; SARFAESI Act, 2002 — s. 14; Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Karnataka High Court, on 04 Jan 2013. The bench was SURAJ GOVINDARAJ, LEGISLATIVE DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT INDIA.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.