Sri. Basavaraj D Patil vs Syndicate Bank
2023 Latest Caselaw 162 Kant

                          1


IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

        DATED THIS THE 3RD DAY OF JANUARY, 2023

                        BEFORE

     THE HON'BLE Mr. JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR

       CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.151 OF 2018

BETWEEN:

1.      SRI.BASAVARAJ D PATIL
        S/O D.D. PATIL
        AGE MAJOR
        R/O NO.12/2
        SREE RANGANATHA NILAYA
        5TH A CROSS, KANAKANAGARA
        R.T.NAGAR POST
        BENGALURU-32.

2.      SMT. KALAVATHI B PATIL
        SRI.BASAVARAJ D PATIL
        AGE MAJOR
        R/O NO.12/2
        SREE RANGANATHA NILAYA
        5TH A CROSS, KANAKANAGARA
        R.T.NAGAR POST
        BENGALURU-32
                                       ...PETITIONERS

(BY SMT. VIJAYA.M.N, ADVOCATE)

AND:

SYNDICATE BANK
GANGANAGAR BRANCH
BENGALURU-32
REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF MANAGER
                                2


AND PA HOLDER
SRI.VALIVELU PRABHAKAR
S/O SAMBASIVAIAH
AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS
                                     ...RESPONDENT
(SRI. M.MOHAN RAO & VIJAY.S., ADVOCATES)

     THIS CIVIL REVISION PETITION IS FILED UNDER
SECTION 18 OF THE KARNATAKA SMALL CAUSES COURTS
ACT., AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED
08.01.2018 PASSED IN S.C.NO.1335/2017 ON THE FILE
OF THE XIII ADDL. JUDGE, COURT OF SMALL CAUSES,
BANGALORE, DECREEING THE SUIT FOR RECOVERY.


    THIS CIVIL REVISION PETITION COMING ON FOR
ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

                          ORDER

This civil revision petition under Section 115 of

CPC is filed by the defendants challenging the judgment

and decree passed by the Court of Small Causes,

Bengaluru in S.C.No.1335/2017 directing the defendants

to repay sum of Rs.1,81,641/- with interest @ 19% p.a.

from the date of suit till realization to the plaintiff-Bank.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits

that the loan account of the petitioners/defendants have

been closed under the one time settlement(OTS)

scheme and defendants have repaid the loan amount to

the plaintiff-Bank.

3. Learned counsel appearing for the plaintiff-

Bank does not dispute that the loan account of the

defendants is closed under OTS scheme.

4. In view of the settlement arrived between

the parties, the impugned judgment and decree requires

to be setaside. Accordingly, I pass the following:

ORDER

1. Civil Revision Petition is allowed.

2. The impugned judgment and decree dated

08.01.2018 passed by the Court of Small Causes at

Bengaluru in S.C.No.1335/2017 is hereby setaside and

consequently the suit filed by the plaintiff stands

disposed of in view of the settlement arrived between

the parties.

3. Petitioners are permitted to withdraw the

amount deposited before this Court by virtue of interim

order granted by this Court on furnishing proper

identification.

4. Petitioners are also entitled for refund of

admissible Court fee.

Sd/-

JUDGE

RKA