- 1 -
W.P.No.103563 of 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2022
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ASHOK S.KINAGI
WRIT PETITION NO.103563 OF 2021 (GM-RES)
BETWEEN:
DR. PRABHUDEV
S/O. CHINNAPPA ANDANI
SHARAN HOSPITAL,
A MULTI SPECIALITY HOSPITAL
GOKAK ROAD, MAHALINGAPUR
AGE. 53 YEARS,
OCC. MEDICAL PRACTITIONER
R/O.MAHALINGAPUR, TQ. MUDHOL,
DIST. BAGALKOT, PIN-587312.
&PETITIONER
(BY SRI SHIVARAJ.P MUDHOL, ADV.)
AND:
1.
THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER,
AND DISTRICT MAGISTRAR BAGALKOT,
AT. BAGALKOT, DIST. BAGALKOT.
PIN-587101.
2.
THE TAHASILDAR
MUDHOL, TQ. MUDHOL
DIST. BAGALKOT, PIN-587313.
3.
THE REVENUE INSPECTOR
OFFICE OF THE REVENUE INSPECTOR
TERDAL, AT. TERDAL
TQ. RABAKAVI-BANAHATTI
DIST. BAGALKOT, PIN-587315.
4.
THE CHIEF MANAGER AND
AUTHORISE OFFICER CORPORATION BANK
MANJANNA
E
Digitally
signed by
MANJANNA
E
Date:
2022.09.03
16:00:41
+0530
- 2 -
W.P.No.103563 of 2021
MUDHOL BRANCH, NOW MERGED WITH
UNION BANK OF INDIA, NTSMVH MUDHOL,
AT. MUDHOL, TALUK. MUDHOL,
DIST.BAGALKOT, PIN.587313.
&RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI GIRISH S.HULMANI, ADV. FOR C/R4
SRI V.S.KALASURMATH, HCGP FOR R1 TO R3)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227
OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING THIS COURT TO ISSUE
WRIT IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED
ORDER DATED 29/11/2018 IN NO.KUMSHA.RRC.CR-12/2018-19
PASSED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT VIDE ANNEXURE-F AND SUCH
OTHER REIEFS.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 8B9
GROUP THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING.
The petitioner has filed this writ petition challenging
the order dated 29.11.2008 passed by the 1st respondent
vide Annexure-F.
Brief facts leading rise to filing of this writ
petition are as under:
The
petitioner
has
obtained
loan
from
respondent No.4-Bank. The petitioner has committed
default in repaying the loan amount. Respondent No.4-
Bank has initiated proceedings under Section 14 of
SARFASI Act for recovery of amount against the petitioner
- 3 -
before the 1st respondent. The 1st Respondent has passed
the impugned order directing the Tahasildar to take
possession of property of the petitioner and handover the
same to respondent No.4-Bank. On the basis of the order
dated 23.09.2021 passed by respondent No.1, the
revenue officials have issued notice to the petitioner fixing
the date for taking the possession. Hence, this writ
petition.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, High
Court Government Pleader for respondent-State and
learned counsel for respondent No.4.
5.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that,
the petitioner in order to show his bonafideness has
deposited Rs.25,00,000/- as per the interim order dated
24.09.2021. He further submits that, the petitioner is not
in a position to pay remaining outstanding dues. He
further submits that, respondent No.1 without hearing the
petitioner has passed the impugned order. The impugned
order passed by respondent No.1 is in violation of
- 4 -
principles of natural justice. Hence, on these grounds he
prayed to allow the writ petition.
6.
Per contra, learned counsel for respondent
No.4-Bank submits that, the petitioner having obtained
loan, has failed to repay the same. Respondent No.4 has
initiated recovery proceedings under the provisions of
SARFASI Act. Respondent No.4 approached respondent
No.1 for taking possession of the property of the petitioner
under reference. He submits that, respondent No.1-Deputy
Commissioner has passed an order. The order passed by
respondent No.1 is in accordance with the provisions of
SARFASI Act. He submits that there is no illegality in the
impugned order. He further submits that, this Court vide
order dated 24.09.2021 granted an interim order subject
to petitioner depositing Rs.25,00,000/- with respondent
No.4-Bank and directed the petitioner to file an affidavit
stating that, he would clear all the outstanding dues within
a period of six months from the date of order. He submits
that the petitioner has deposited Rs.25,00,000/- but he
- 5 -
has not filed any affidavit. The period mentioned in the
said order is already expired. The petitioner has not
complied with the interim order granted by this Court. He
submits that, the petitioner has not shown any bonafide in
approaching this Court. Hence, on these grounds, he prays
to dismiss the writ petition.
7.
Per contra, learned High Court Government
Pleader adopts the arguments advanced by the learned
counsel for respondent No.4.
8.
Heard and perused the records and considered
the submissions of learned counsel for the parties.
9.
It is not in dispute that, the petitioner has
obtained a loan from respondent No.4-Bank and it is also
not in dispute that, the petitioner has committed default in
repaying the loan amount. Respondent No.4 has initiated
recovery proceedings under the provision of SARFASI Act.
Respondent No.4 has filed petition under Section 14 of the
SARFASI Act before respondent No.1 for taking possession
- 6 -
of the property under reference. Respondent No.1-Deputy
Commissioner has passed an order by allowing the
application filed by respondent No.4 and directed the 2nd
respondent to take possession of the property under
reference.
10.
This Court vide order dated 24.09.2021 granted
an interim order subject to payment of Rs.25,00,000/-
with respondent No.4 and further directed the petitioner to
file an affidavit stating that he would clear all the
outstanding dues within a period of six months from the
date of order. Though the petitioner has deposited an
amount of Rs.25,00,
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.