Karnataka High Court
Sree Mukkaneswari Coconut ... vs State Bank Of India on 27 January, 2023
Bench: Chief Justice, Ashok S.Kinagi
-1-
WA No. 848 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 27TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2023
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR PRASANNA B. VARALE, CHIEF JUSTICE
AND
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ASHOK S.KINAGI
WRIT APPEAL NO. 848 OF 2022 (GM-DRT)
BETWEEN:
1. SREE MUKKANESWARI COCONUT INDUSTRIES
NO. 42/3, HALKURIKE ROAD,
BYRANAYAKANAHALLI, HONNAVALLI HOBLI,
TIPTUR TALUK, TUMKUR DISTRICT
REP. BY ITS PROPRIETOR
SRI. R.C. SHARANAPPA
S/O R.V CHANDRASHEKARAPPA
Digitally
signed by D K AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS.
BHASKAR
Location: 2. SRI. R.C SHANARNAPPA
High Court of
Karnataka S/O R.V CHANDRAPPA
AGED 55 YEARS
R/AT NO. 790/1, C/O SHANKARANARAYANA
NEAR EKALAVYA MOTORS, PUMP HOUSE ROAD,
TIPTUR 572201.
3. SMT. SUDAMANI
W/O R.C. SHANARANAPPA
AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS
-2-
WA No. 848 of 2022
R/AT NO. 790/1, C/O SHANKARANARAYANA
NEAR EKALAVYA MOTORS, PUMP HOUSE ROAD,
TIPTUR 572201.
...APPELLANTS
(BY SRI. RAVI P. K. - ADVOCATE FOR
SRI. JAGADEESHACHARI, ADVOCATE)
AND:
STATE BANK OF INDIA
P.B. NO. 25-2328
RAILWAY STATION ROAD,
TIPTUR , TUMKUR DISTRICT-572 201
REP BY ITS CHIEF MANAGER,
SMT. RAJASHREE .S KAMATH.
...RESPONDENT
THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED U/S 4 OF THE KARNATAKA
HIGH COURT ACT, 1961, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER
DATED 03.08.2022 PASSED IN W.P.NO.10487/2022 BY
ALLOWING THE WRIT APPEAL AND DISMISS THE T.A No-
1957/2017 FILED BY THE RESPONDENT.
THIS WRIT APPEAL, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY
HEARING, THIS DAY, THE CHIEF JUSTICE DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
The appellant is before this Court challenging the order of
the learned Single Judge dated 03.08.2022 in
W.P.No.10487/2022.
WA No. 848 of 2022
2. The learned Single Judge, by observing that a
statutory remedy of an appeal is available to the petitioner, and
further observing that in such a situation the view of the Apex
Court is that a Writ Court should not grant indulgence in such
matters, disposed of the writ petition reserving liberty to the
petitioner to explore the other alternative remedies, in
accordance with law. All the contentions were kept open by the
learned Single Judge.
The learned Single Judge also further observed that as
the petitioner was before this Court in the writ petition, the
time spent in prosecuting the petition as well, was liable to be
discounted in computing the period of limitation, which has
made a way for the petitioner to avail the appropriate remedy.
3. We are unable to see any error in the order of the
learned Single Judge permitting the petitioner to avail
appropriate remedy, which admittedly causes no prejudice, as
the petitioner can raise his grievance before the appropriate
Forum by availing the efficacious and alternative remedy. In
this fact situation, in our opinion, the appeal is devoid of any
WA No. 848 of 2022
merit and as such, deserves to be dismissed. Accordingly, the
appeal is dismissed.
Sd/-
CHIEF JUSTICE
Sd/-
JUDGE
KS
