Karnataka High Court
Sri. V Thulasi Ram vs Canara Bank on 22 October, 2024
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC:42328-DB
WA No. 1068 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF OCTOBER, 2024
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR. N. V. ANJARIA, CHIEF JUSTICE
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. V. ARAVIND
WRIT APPEAL NO. 1068 OF 2024 (GM-RES)
BETWEEN:
1. SRI V. THULASI RAM
S/O. SRI VISHWANATH,
AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS,
RESIDENT OF HOUSE No.3208,
6TH MAIN ROAD, 13TH CROSS,
HAL 2ND STAGE, INDIRA NAGAR,
BENGALURU - 560 008.
2. SMT. BHUVANESHWARI
W/O. SHRI THULASI RAM
AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS,
RESIDENT OF HOUSE No.3208,
Digitally signed 6TH MAIN ROAD, 13TH CROSS,
by VALLI HAL 2ND STAGE, INDIRA NAGAR,
MARIMUTHU
BENGALURU - 560 008.
Location: High
Court of ...APPELLANTS
Karnataka (BY SRI X.M. JOSEPH, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. CANARA BANK
MAGADI ROAD II BRANCH,
No.46, MAGADI MAIN ROAD
BESIDE ANJAN CINEMAS
BENGALURU - 560 023.
REPRESENTED BY ITS
AUTHORISED OFFICER UNDER
SARFAESI ACT, 2002.
...RESPONDENT
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC:42328-DB
WA No. 1068 of 2024
THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED U/S 4 OF THE KARNATAKA
HIGH COURT ACT, 1961 PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE FINAL
ORDER DATED 08/07/2024 PASSED IN WRIT PETITION
NO.13424/2024 AND PASS SUCH OTHER ORDER.
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING,
THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. JUSTICE
N. V. ANJARIA
and
HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K. V. ARAVIND
ORAL JUDGMENT
(PER: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
MR. JUSTICE N. V. ANJARIA)
Heard learned advocate Mr.X.M. Joseph for the appellants.
2. Invoking the jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the
Constitution, the appellants made prayers in two folds. The first part
of the prayer is to set aside and/or expunge the recordings dated
29.12.2023, 08.02.2024 and 26.02.2024 (copy produced at
Annexure-D) recorded by learned X Additional Chief Metropolitan
Magistrate, Bengaluru in Crl.Misc.No.50231 of 2021 as incorrect and
arbitrary. The second limb of the prayer is to set aside and/or
expunge the recordings dated 20.04.2024 recorded by the same
NC: 2024:KHC:42328-DB
Court in the very proceedings in which the expression "mischievous
memos" was employed.
3. The aforesaid proceedings of Crl.Misc.No.50231 of 2021 are
under the provisions of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of
Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002
(SARFAESI Act). They are in relation to the petitioners-the husband
and wife who have taken housing loan for purchase of house.
4. It appears that in the said proceedings, certain miscellaneous
orders/endorsements came to be passed by learned Judge while
adjourning the proceedings from time to time. The order sheet is
produced.
5. It is true that the word "mischievous memos" etc., are used by
learned Magistrate. The Court is of the view that a Judicial Officer
should desist and dissuade himself or herself from using
indiscriminate language in the judicial orders.
6. Apart above, no rights accrue for the petitioners to get the
same set aside inasmuch as they are the miscellaneous
observations/orders/endorsements passed in the course of the
proceedings which do not decide any of the rights of the parties and
NC: 2024:KHC:42328-DB
do not reflect on the rights of the parties. The prayers in the nature
made and advanced in the petition could hardly be granted.
7. Furthermore, the record suggests that the Court of Chief
Metropolitan Magistrate has already passed final order under Section
14 of the SARFAESI Act allowing the petition of the Canara Bank-
respondent herein directing to take over possession of the property
from the appellants.
8. In the above context, learned Single Judge, while dismissing
the writ petition, rightly observed that the petitioners have alternative
statutory, efficacious remedy under Section 17 of the SARFAESI Act.
Therefore, learned Single Judge has not entertained the petition,
without expressing any opinion on the merits and reserving liberty for
the petitioners to approach the Debt Recovery Tribunal under Section
17 of the SARFAESI Act. Learned Single Judge directed the
petitioners to deposit a sum of Rs.1,00,00,000/- out of which,
Rs.60,00,000/- came to be deposited by the petitioners. The
remaining balance, it was observed by learned Single Judge, shall be
paid by the petitioners within two weeks and that the interim order
passed on 27.05.2024 was directed to continue for further period of
three weeks.
NC: 2024:KHC:42328-DB
9. No error could be booked in the order of learned Single Judge
disposing of the petition reserving liberty for the petitioners to
approach the Debt Recovery Tribunal by exhausting the alternative
remedy. The challenge is meritless.
10. The appeal is accordingly dismissed.
In view of dismissal of the appeal, the interlocutory applications
would not survive and they stand accordingly disposed of.
Sd/-
(N. V. ANJARIA)
CHIEF JUSTICE
Sd/-
(K. V. ARAVIND)
JUDGE
DDU
