Karnataka High Court
The State Bank Of Mysore vs Sri. Srikumar on 20 April, 2023
Bench: Chief Justice, M.G.S. Kamal
-1-
WA No. 206 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF APRIL, 2023
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR. PRASANNA B. VARALE, CHIEF JUSTICE
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL
WRIT APPEAL NO. 206 OF 2022 (GM-RES)
BETWEEN:
1. THE STATE BANK OF MYSORE
ASSET RECOVERY MANAGEMENT BRANCH
2ND FLOOR, 'A' BLOCK, BKG COMPLEX
MYSORE BANK CIRCLE, AVENUE ROAD
BENGALURU - 560009
2. STATE BANK OF INDIA
BANGARPET BRANCH
BANGARPET TALUK
KOLAR-563114
3. STATE BANK OF INDIA
Digitally signed HEAD OFFICE NO.65
by K P SWETHA
ST. MARKS ROAD
Location: HIGH
COURT OF BENGALURU - 560001
KARNATAKA REP BY CHIEF MANAGER S.N.MURTHY
...APPELLANTS
(BY SRI G KRISHNA MURTHY, SENIOR ADVOCATE FOR
SRI SHERIF AHMED ALTAFHASSAN, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. SRI SRIKUMAR
S/O LATE THYAGARAJ
-2-
WA No. 206 of 2022
AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS
PROPS: COMPUTER INDIA
DR B R AMBEDKAR ROAD
OPP: TELEPHONE EXCHANGE
ROBERTSONPET
KOLAR GOLD FIELDS
DISTRICT: KOLAR - 563122
...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI SANDESH P. NADIGER, ADVOCATE FOR
SRI G. BALAKRISHNA SHASTRY, ADVOCATE)
THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED U/S 4 OF THE KARNATAKA
HIGH COURT ACT, 1961 PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER
DATED 15/12/2021 AND ORDER DATED 28/01/2022 PASSED IN
W.P.NO.8591/2021 AND ETC.
THIS WRIT APPEAL COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY,
CHIEF JUSTICE DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
By the order dated 06.09.2022, the writ appeal was
dismissed for want of prosecution. I.A.No.2/2023 is filed to
recall the order dated 06.09.2022 and I.A.No.1/2023 is filed
seeking condonaton of delay in filing the recalling application.
2. For the reasons stated in the affidavit
accompanying the application, the delay in filing the recalling
application is condoned. Accordingly, I.A.No.1/2023 is allowed.
WA No. 206 of 2022
3. The learned Senior Counsel appearing for the
appellants -Bank invited our attention to paragraphs 4 to 7 of
the affidavit accompanying the application and submitted that
the absence of the counsel on 06.09.2022 was unintentional
and for bona fide reasons. Accepting his submissions, the order
dated 06.09.2022 is recalled and the appeal is restored to its
file. Accordingly, I.A.No.2/2023 is allowed.
4. With the consent of the learned counsel for the
parties, the appeal is taken up for hearing.
5. On perusal of the orders dated 15.12.2021 and
28.01.2022 which are impugned in the writ appeal, we do not
find any error committed by the learned Single Judge in
passing the said orders.
6. At this stage, the learned Senior Counsel submits
that W.P.No.8591/2021 is listed before the learned Single
Judge tomorrow (21.04.2023) itself for hearing. He submits
that though the Bank had filed statement of objections but,
inadvertently, the same was not placed before the learned
Single Judge. He further submits that a separate memo is also
WA No. 206 of 2022
filed along with certain documents on which the Bank places
reliance in support of its contentions.
7. In view of the above facts, it can safely be said that
the learned Single Judge would certainly consider the
submissions and counter submissions of the parties and decide
the petition on merits. As such, it is not necessary for us to
record any observation on merits of the case.
8. With these observations, the writ appeal is disposed
of.
Sd/-
CHIEF JUSTICE
Sd/-
JUDGE
BKV
