Karnataka High Court
Smt Munilakshmamma vs Sri A V L N Raju on 15 February, 2022
Bench: S.Sujatha, Ravi V Hosmani
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 15TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2022
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE S. SUJATHA
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI V. HOSMANI
W.A.No.2025/2017 (GM-RES)
C/W
W.A.No. 2024/2017 (GM-RES)
IN W.A.No.2025/2017 (GM-RES):
BETWEEN:
SMT. MUNILAKSHMAMMA
D/O LATE MR.PAPAIAH
AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS
R/AT NO.21/22
HOUSE LIST NO.118, KHATHA NO.99
BANDE COLONY, GEDDALAHALLI VILLAGE
ADJACENT TO AECS LAYOUT
KASABA HOBLI
BANGALORE NORTH TALUK
BENGALURU-560 094.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. H.R.ANANTHA KRISHNA MURTHY, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE BANK OF INDIA
STRESSED ASSETS RESOLUTION CENTRE
CARE OF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE
BALAJINAGAR, SRIPURAM JUNCTION
VISHAKAPATNAM-530 003.
-2-
2. M/s. KATYAYANI SEA FOODS PVT. LTD.,
C/O SRI. N.NARASIMHA RAJU
MANAGING DIRECTOR
KODURUPADU VILLAGE, ALLAVARAM MANDAL
EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT-533 217.
3. SRI. NARASIMHA RAJU
AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS
S/O VENAKATAPATI RAJU
C/O N.NARASIMHA RAJU
MANAGING DIRECTOR
KODURUPADU VILLAGE
ALLAVARAM MANDAL
EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT-533 217.
4. SMT. A.INDIRA DEVI
AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS
W/O MR.A.V.L.N. RAJU
SAMANTHAKURRU VILLAGE
ALLAVARAM MANDAL
EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT-533 217.
5. SRI. A.V.L.N. RAJU
S/O MR.SATHYANARAYANA RAJU
AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS
R/AT SAMANHAKURRU VILLAGE-577 217.
ALLAVARAM MANDAL
EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT-533 217.
6. SRI. G.R.SANJEEVAPPA
AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS
S/O G.M.RAMAKRISHNAPPA
NO.171, 1ST CROSS, 1ST MAIN
G.M.R. LAYOUT, R.M.V. 2ND STAGE
SANJAYNAGAR, BANGALORE-94.
7. SRI. A.SATHYANARAYANA RAJU
AGED ABOUT 76 YEARS
S/O MR.NARASIMHA RAJU
SAMANHAKURRU VILLAGE
ALLAVARAM MANDAL
EAST GODAVARI DIST-533217.
-3-
8. SMT. G.R.VANITHA
AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS
C/O MRS. G.R.KAMALAVATHI
GPA HOLDER NO.179/3
G.M.RAMAKRISHNAPPA LAYOUT
RMV 2ND STAGE, GEDDALAHALLI
BANGALORE-560 094.
9. MRS. G.M.KAVITHA
AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS
NO.179/2, G.M.RAMAKRISHNAPPA LAYOUT
RMV 2ND STAGE, GEDDALAHALLI
BANGALORE-560 094.
10. SRI. G.M.RAJESH
AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS
NO.179/2, G.M.RAMAKRISHNAPPA LAYOUT
RMV 2ND STAGE, GEDDALAHALLI
BANGALORE-94.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. M.K. VENKATRAMANA, ADVOCATE FOR R1;
SRI. K.V. SHYAMA PRASADA, ADVOCATE FOR R5,
LR's OF R6 & R7; SRI. SIDDHARATH SUMAN, ADVOCATE
FOR R8 TO R10; NOTICE SERVED TO R2 & R3 V/O DATED
14.02.2018; NOTICE SERVED TO R4 THROUGH PAPER
PUBLICATION)
THIS W.A. NO.2025/2017 IS FILED UNDER SECTION 4 OF
THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE
ORDER PASSED BY HON'BLE SINGLE JUDGE OF THIS HON'BLE
COURT IN W.P.NO.49374-375/2013 (GM-RES) DATED
14.02.2017 AND IN SO FAR AS IT PERTAINS TO ENQUIRE INTO
THE CLAIMS BEFORE THE VIII ADDITIONAL CHIEF
METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE, BENGALURU AND DIRECTING
THAT THE ORDER PASSED IN ASA NO.138/2007 BE ALSO BE
ENQUIRED.
-4-
IN W.A.2024/2017 (GM-RES):
BETWEEN:
SMT. MUNILAKSHMAMMA
D/O LATE MR.PAPAIAH
AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS
R/AT NO.21/22
HOUSE LIST NO.118, KHATHA NO.99
BANDE COLONY, GEDDALAHALLI VILLAGE
ADJACENT TO AECS LAYOUT
KASABA HOBLI
BANGALORE NORTH TALUK
BENGALURU-560 094.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. H.R.ANANTHA KRISHNA MURTHY, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. SRI. A.V.L.N. RAJU
S/O MR.SATHYANARAYANA RAJU
AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS
R/AT AJAY AVENUE, DOMALAGUDA
HYDERABAD-533 217.
2. SMT. G.R.VANITHA
AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS
C/O MRS. G.R.KAMALAVATHI
GPA HOLDER NO.179/3
G.M.RAMAKRISHNAPPA LAYOUT
RMV 2ND STAGE, GEDDALAHALLI
BANGALORE-560 094.
3. MRS. G.M.KAVITHA
AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS
NO.179/2, G.M.RAMAKRISHNAPPA LAYOUT
RMV 2ND STAGE, GEDDALAHALLI
BANGALORE-560 094.
-5-
4. SRI. G.M.RAJESH
AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS
NO.179/2, G.M.RAMAKRISHNAPPA LAYOUT
RMV 2ND STAGE, GEDDALAHALLI
BANGALORE-94.
RESPONDENTS 2 TO 4 ARE
REPRESENTED BY THEIR GPA HOLDER
PETITIONER NO.1.
5. THE STATE BANK OF INDIA
STRESSED ASSETS RESOLUTION CENTRE
BALAJINAGAR, VISHAKAPATNAM-530 003
REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER.
6. M/s. KATYAYANI SEA FOODS PVT. LTD.,
C/O SRI. N.NARASIMHA RAJU
MANAGING DIRECTOR
KODURUPADU VILLAGE, ALLAVARAM MANDAL
EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT-533 217.
7. SRI. NARASIMHA RAJU
AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS
S/O VENAKATAPATI RAJU
KODURUPADU VILLAGE
ALLAVARAM MANDAL
EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT-533 217.
8. SMT. A.INDIRA DEVI
AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS
W/O MR.A.V.L.N. RAJU
D/O MR.A.SATHYANARAYANA RAJU
SAMANTHAKURRU VILLAGE
ALLAVARAM MANDAL
EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT-533 217.
9. SRI. G.R.SANJEEVAPPA
AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS
S/O G.M.RAMAKRISHNAPPA
NO.171, 1ST CROSS, 1ST MAIN
G.M.R. LAYOUT, R.M.V. 2ND STAGE
SANJAYNAGAR, BANGALORE-94.
-6-
10. SRI. A.SATHYANARAYANA RAJU
AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS
S/O MR.NARASIMHA RAJU
SAMANHAKURRU VILLAGE
ALLAVARAM MANDAL
EAST GODAVARI DIST-533217.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. K.V. SHYAMA PRASADA, ADV., FOR R1,
LR's OF R9 & R10; SRI. SIDDHARATH SUMAN, ADV.,
FOR R2 TO R4; SRI. M.K. VENKATRAMANA, ADVOCATE
FOR R5; NOTICE SERVED TO R6 & R7 ARE HELD SUFFICIENT
V/O DATED 01.03.2019; NOTICE SERVED TO R8 IS HELD
SUFFICIENT)
THIS W.A. NO.2024/2017 IS FILED UNDER SECTION 4 OF
THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE
ORDER DATED 14.02.2017 PASSED IN THE WRIT PETITION
NO.21891/2013.
THESE APPEALS ARE COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY,
RAVI V. HOSMANI J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
Though these appeals are listed for orders, in view of
specific submission of learned counsel for respondents that
above appeals are rendered infructuous, they were heard
for disposal, with consent of learned Counsel.
2. These two writ appeals are filed challenging
common judgment dated 14.02.2017 passed by learned
Single Judge of this Court in W.P.No.21891/2013 and
W.P.Nos.23711-23713/2013 connected with
W.P.Nos.49374-49375/2013. The appellant herein was
respondent no.7 (hereinafter referred to as 'appellant') in
W.P.No.21891/2013 and W.P.Nos.23711-13/2013. Said writ
petition was filed challenging order dated 06.04.2013
passed by 8th Addl.Chief Metropolitan Magistrate in
Crl.Misc.No.225/2008.
3. Respondent no.1 in above writ petition namely
State Bank of India, (hereinafter referred to as
'respondent-bank') filed W.P.Nos.49374-75/2013
challenging order dated 10.03.2008 passed by Debt
Recovery Tribunal, Bengaluru in ASA No.138/2007.
4. Brief facts leading to these appeals are that
appellant herein claims to be owner of site bearing
no.21/22, House list no.118, Khata no.99 of Bande Colony,
Geddalahalli village, Kasaba Hobli, Bengaluru North Taluk,
Bengaluru. She claims to have put up construction over
property and residing therein with her family members. She
also claims to have obtained electricity, water and gas
connection there for. She claims that property measures
east-west 60 ft. and north-south 60 ft.
5. Such being the case, respondent-bank issued
paper publication dated 08.05.2007 notifying initiation of
proceedings under Securitisation and Reconstruction of
Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act,
2002 (hereinafter referred to as 'SARFAESI Act') and
inviting tenders for sale of site no.10, 11 and 12 formed out
of Sy.no.33/3A-1 of Geddalahalli village.
6. Challenging said notice, appellant filed ASA
no.138/2007 under Section 17 of SARFAESI Act before the
Debt Recovery Tribunal, Bengaluru. By order dated
10.03.2008, same was allowed in part directing respondent-
bank to proceed with sale of site nos.10, 11 and 12 only to
an extent of measurement of east-west 30 ft. each and
north-south 40 ft. each leaving untouched remaining i.e.
210 ft. north to south.
7. Said order was challenged by Petitioner no.4
herein (Sri G.M. Rajesh) in W.P.No.29978/2009. But same
was dismissed as withdrawn on 16.08.2010.
8. In the meanwhile, it appears respondent-bank
had filed petition under Section 14 of SARFAESI Act before
jurisdictional Magistrate for assistance in taking possession
of secured asset. Said petition was allowed on 29.03.2008
and respondent bank was permitted to take possession of
schedule property with assistance of police. The schedule of
petition comprised:
1. House site no.1, assessment no.33/3A-1
situated in Sy.no.36/1 of Geddalahalli
village measuring east-west 55 ft. north to
south 33 ft. comprising residential house in
the name of AVLN Raju;
2. House site no.10, assessment no.33/3A-1
situated at Geddalahalli village measuring
east west 30 feet and north-south 250 feet
belonging to Smt.R.G.Vanitha;
3. House site no.11 assessment no.33/3A-1
situated at Geddalahalli village measuring
east west 30 feet and north-south 250 feet
belonging to Smt.R.G.Kavitha and
4. House site no.12, corporation ward no.100,
Sy.no.33/3A-1 at Geddalahalli village
- 10 -
measuring east-west 30 feet and north-
south 250 feet belonging to
Sri.R.G.Muniswamy.
9. Challenging said order, appellant herein had filed
W.P.No.38398/2012 before this Court. But said writ petition
was dismissed on 14.12.2012 on the ground that
description of petitioner's property and properties
mentioned in schedule of impugned order, did not tally.
However, Writ Appeal no.320/2013, filed there against, was
disposed of on 05.03.2013, directing Magistrate to dispose
of Crl.Misc.No.2258/2008 in accordance with law after
hearing both parties.
10. In pursuance of said order, learned Magistrate
passed impugned order dated 06.04.2013 after hearing
appellant herein as impleading applicant and by framing a
point, whether order dated 29.03.2008 passed by it
required modification. After taking into account order dated
10.03.2008, passed by Debt Recovery Tribunal in ASA
No.138/2007, Learned Magistrate allowed impleading
applicant's contention and modified its order by bringing it
- 11 -
in conformity with order passed by Tribunal in ASA
No.138/2007.
11. Challenging order dated 06.04.2013 in Crl.
Misc.225/2008, borrowers filed W.P.Nos.21891/2013 and
23711-13/2013 while respondent-bank filed
W.P.Nos.49374-75/2013 assailing order dated 10.03.2008
passed by Tribunal in ASA No.138/2007.
12. At the outset, learned Single Judge considered
petition challenging order passed in ASA No.138/2007.
While refusing interference in the impugned order, learned
Single Judge, took note of statement of objections filed by
respondent-bank in W.P.No.29978/2009, wherein it had
sought to justify order dated 10.03.2008. Even fact that
respondent-bank was a party in W.P.No.38398/2012 and in
W.A.No.320/2013, without demur, held that it had
acquiesced to order of remand.
13. Insofar as writ petition filed by borrowers,
learned Single Judge held that learned Magistrate had failed
to afford opportunity to petitioners, while modifying its
- 12 -
earlier order and only on that ground set-aside the order
and remitted matter back to learned Magistrate for fresh
consideration, after hearing all parties.
14. In terms of said order, Crl.Misc.No.225/2008
stood restored on the file of Magistrate. During pendency of
these appeals, it is stated that learned Magistrate passed
orders on 12.04.2018 allowing petition filed by respondent-
bank.
15. It is submitted by respondents that challenging
said order, appellant herein has filed W.P.No.21730/2018
and obtained interim order and said petition is pending
consideration before this Court. Therefore, in view of
subsequent events, above writ appeals have been rendered
infructuous.
16. Learned counsel for appellant is unable to
dispute above facts.
17. As appellant herein has not only appeared but
also contested matter after remand and learned Magistrate
after considering contentions put forth by appellant herein
- 13 -
passed orders and Appellant's challenge to said order is
presently pending consideration, we are not inclined to
entertain above appeals.
Hence, we pass the following:
ORDER
Writ Appeals are dismissed, reserving liberty to the
appellant to raise all contentions before the learned Single
Judge in the pending writ petition.
All the rights and contentions of both the parties are
kept open.
No order as to costs.
Sd/-
JUDGE
Sd/-
JUDGE
CLK
