IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 24^TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.3899/2025 (KPIDFA)

BETWEEN:

M/S. MANTHAN CREATIONS THE PARTNERSHIP FIRM HAVING OFFICE AT NO.40 II FLOOR, 2^ND MAIN ROAD H. SIDDAIAH ROAD, 1ST CROSS Digitally signed OPP KATARIYA TRANST by ARSHIFA SUDHAMANAGAR BAHAR KHANAM BANGALORE 560 027 Location: High REP. BY ITS PARTNER Court Of JITESH KUMAR BAFNA Karnataka …APPELLANT (BY SRI. UMESH M.N. ADV.,)

AND:

THE COMPETENT AUTHORITY (SRI. KANVA SOUHARDA CO-OPERATIVE CREDIT LTD., KANVA GROUP OF COMPANIES) THE ADDITIONAL REGIONAL COMMISSIONER BANGALORE DIVISION, BMTC BUILDING 'C' BLOCK, II FLOOR, K.H ROAD SHANTHINAGAR, BANGALORE 560 027.

…RESPONDENT (BY SRI. VEERESH RACHAPPA BUDIHAL, ADV.,)

THIS MFA IS FILED U/S.16 OF THE KARNATAKA PROTECTION OF INTEREST OF DEPOSITORS IN FINANCIAL ESTABLISHMENTS ACT, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 25.04.2024 PASSED ON MAINTAINABILITY IN MISC.PETITION NO.377/2024, PASSED BY THE HON'BLE XCI ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE AND SPL. JUDGE FOR KPIDFE CASES BENGALURU (CCH-92) AND CONSEQUENTLY ALLOW THE PETITION & ETC.

THIS MFA HAVING BEEN HEARD AND RESERVED ON

18.11.2025, COMING ON FOR PRONOUNCEMENT OF JUDGMENT, THIS DAY VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN and HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL

CAV JUDGMENT

(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL) This appeal is filed by the appellant under Section 16 of the Karnataka Protection of Interest of Depositors in Financial Establishments Act, 2004 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') challenging the order dated 25.04.2024 passed in Misc.No.377/2024 by the XCI Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru and Special Judge for KPIDFE Cases, Bengaluru (hereinafter referred to as 'the Trial Court').

2. Sri. Umesh.M.N, learned counsel appearing for the appellant submits that the appellant is undertaking business involving wholesale distribution of garments. The appellant supplied various products to M/s.Kanva Fashions and Kanva Garments Pvt. Ltd., on the basis of purchase orders and also raised invoice on the basis of the supply made. The appellant supplied garments worth Rs.2,86,47,278/- and Rs.11,47,841/- on credit basis. The M/s.Kanva Fashions and Kanva Garments Pvt. Ltd., failed to make the payment and later the appellant came to know that the properties of the said company were attached and public notice was invited from the depositors and creditors. The appellant requested for a claim form from the respondent-authority, however, the respondent issued endorsement that due to delay in submitting the claim form, the claim is rejected. It is submitted that the appellant filed miscellaneous petition before the trial Court which came to be dismissed. It is further submitted that the trial Court has erred in rejecting the petition, without appreciating that the appellant is required to be considered as a depositor. Hence, he seeks to condone the delay of 344 days in filing the appeal and seeks to allow the appeal on merits.

3. Sri.Veeresh Rachappa Budihal, learned counsel appearing for the respondent-authority submits that there is no cause shown to condone the delay of 344 days in filing the appeal. Hence, solely on the ground of delay, the appeal is liable to be rejected. It is submitted that the definition of 'Depositor' under the Act clearly excludes the persons to whom credit is extended by a seller in the course of a sale of a property. The pleading on record clearly indicates that the appellant claims to have supplied the material to M/s.Kanva Fashions and Kanva Garments Pvt.Ltd., on credit basis. Hence, he seeks to dismiss the appeal.

4. We have heard the arguments advanced by the learned counsel appearing for the appellant, learned counsel appearing for the respondent and perused the material available on record. We hav