MR. R RAMACHANDRA v. THE AUTHORIZED OFFICER AND CHIEF MANAGER
Case at a glance
Outcome
Allowed
unless the writ petition is allowed by setting aside the
Provisions considered
- Constitution of India arts. 226, 227
- Limitation Act, 1963 s. 14
Key paragraphs
- Para 88. In that view of the matter, this Court is passing the following : ORDER i. The writ petitions are disposed of, giving liberty to the petitioner to avail the appropriate remedy before the DRT. - 6 - NC: 2026:KHC:22919 WP No. 27861 of 2024…
Judgment
MR. R RAMACHANDRA S/O. MR. RANGAIAH AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS, DOOR NO 115, 'A', 9TH CROSS, SARASWATHIPURAM, HEMAVATHINAGARA, MAIN ROAD, HASSAN - 573 201. …PETITIONER Digitally signed by SUVARNA T Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA (BY SRI. K. SHASHIKANTH PRASAD,ADVOCATE) AND: THE AUTHORIZED OFFICER AND CHIEF MANAGER STATE BANK OF INDIA, STRESSED ASSETS RECOVERY BRANCH, BUILDING NO.11/90. III FLOOR, NEAR OLD SHIVAJI THEATRE, J.C.ROAD, BENGALURU-560 002 (BY SRI. NANDISH PATIL, C.P.NO.18047/2024) ADVOCATE …RESPONDENT C/R FOR - 2 - NC: 2026:KHC:22919 WP No. 27861 of 2024 C/W WP No. 6669 of 2024 HC-KAR THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO-SET ASIDE THE PROPERTY VACATING NOTICE DTD 03.10.2024 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT (THE AUTHORIZED OFFICER AND CHIEF MANAGER, STATE BANK OF INDIA, STRESSED ASSETS RECOVERY BRANCH) (ANNEXURE-A) AND ETC. IN WP NO. 6669/2024 BETWEEN: MR. R RAMACHANDRA, S/O MR RANGAIAH, AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS, DOOR NO. 115, A. 9TH CROSS, SARASWATHIPURAM, HEMAVATHINAGARA, MAIN ROAD, HASSAN - 573 201. ...PETITIONER (BY SRI. K. SHASHIKANTH PRASAD, ADVOCATE) AND: THE AUTHORIZED OFFICER AND CHIEF MANAGER STATE BANK OF INDIA, STRESSED ASSETS RECOVERY BRANCH, 3RD FLOOR, BUILDING NO. 11/90, NEAR OLD SHIVAJI THEATRE, J C ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 002. ...RESPONDENT (BY SRI. NANDISH PATIL, ADVOCATE FOR C/R C.P.NO.20959/2023) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF - 3 - NC: 2026:KHC:22919 WP No. 27861 of 2024 C/W WP No. 6669 of 2024 HC-KAR THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE PROPERTY VACATING NOTICE DATED 20/02/2024 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT (THE AUTHORIZED OFFICER AND CHIEF MANAGER, STATE BANK OF INDIA, STRESSED ASSETS RECOVERY BRANCH) (ANNEXURE-A). THESE PETITIONS, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI COMMAN ORAL ORDER W.P. No.27861/2024 is filed seeking the following prayers: "(a) Set-aside the Property Vacating Notice dated 03-10-2024 issued by the Respondent [THE AUTHORIZED OFFICER & CHIEF MANAGER. STATE BANK OF INDIA, STRESSED ASSETS RECOVERY BRANCH] [ANNEXURE-A] (b) Grant such other relief/s, as this Hon'ble Court deems to Grant, under circumstances of the petition, in the interest of justice. "
W.P. No.6669/2024 is filed seeking the following prayers: - 4 - NC: 2026:KHC:22919 WP No. 27861 of 2024 C/W WP No. 6669 of 2024 HC-KAR "(a) Set-aside the Property Vacating Notice dated 20-02-2024 issued by the Respondent [THE AUTHORIZED OFFICER & CHIEF MANAGER,, STATE BANK OF INDIA, STRESSED ASSETS RECOVERY BRANCH] [ANNEXURE-A] (b) Grant such other relief/s, as this Hon'ble Court deems to Grant, Under circumstance of the petition, in the interest of Justice. "
It is a contention of the petitioner that as per the statement given by the respondent Bank, the petitioner is required to pay only Rs.30,00,000/- and odd, and he is ready to pay the same within a period of 180 days.
Learned counsel appearing for the respondent-Bank submits that the petitioner is having two accounts. SARFAESI proceedings have been initiated and the notices under Section 13(2) of the SARFAESI Act have been issued in respect of both the accounts. According the respondent Bank, outstanding is Rs.66,60,000/-. The same is disputed by the learned counsel for the petitioner.
Operative part
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the outstanding amount is only Rs.30,00,000/- and that the - 5 - NC: 2026:KHC:22919 WP No. 27861 of 2024 C/W WP No. 6669 of 2024 HC-KAR petitioner is a senior citizen. It is further submitted that, unless the writ petition is allowed by setting aside the impugned notice, it would cause lot of prejudice to the petitioner.
This Court wanted to dispose of the writ petition, provided the petitioner is ready to pay the amount. However, there is a dispute as to whether the outstanding amount is Rs.30,00,000/- or Rs.60,00,000/- and also as to whether the SARFAESI proceedings can be initiated against the other loan account.
All these questions, the DRT will be in a better position to decide, where the parties will be able to produce evidence in support of their respective contentions before the DRT.
In that view of the matter, this Court is passing the following : ORDER i. The writ petitions are disposed of, giving liberty to the petitioner to avail the appropriate remedy before the DRT. - 6 - NC: 2026:KHC:22919 WP No. 27861 of 2024 C/W WP No. 6669 of 2024 HC-KAR ii. iii. The petitioner shall have the benefit of Section 14 of the Limitation Act. The petitioner shall approach the DRT within 40 days from the date of the receipt of the copy of this order. Till such time, interim order granted earlier continue to operate. iv. Pending IAs., if any, shall stand closed. Sd/- (LALITHA KANNEGANTI) JUDGE SMC List No.: 1 Sl No.: 1
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: unless the writ petition is allowed by setting aside the
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Constitution of India — arts. 226, 227; Limitation Act, 1963 — s. 14.
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.