Smt. Beena Prasad vs Corporation Bank
2025 Latest Caselaw 11275 Kant

Karnataka High Court

Smt. Beena Prasad vs Corporation Bank on 12 December, 2025

                                            -1-
                                                    NC: 2025:KHC:52897-DB
                                                      WA No. 297 of 2025


                HC-KAR



                    IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

                         DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2025

                                         PRESENT

                      THE HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE

                                            AND

                          THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA

                           WRIT APPEAL NO. 297 OF 2025 (GM-RES)

               BETWEEN:
               1.   SMT. BEENA PRASAD
                    W/O. S.N. PADMAPRASAD
                    AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS
                    R/O DOOR NO.2
                    PARK VIEW, III MAIN
                    JAYALAKSHMIPURAM
                    MYSURU - 570 012
                                                            ...APPELLANT
               (BY MS. NIVEDITHA C. SHIVANAIKAR, ADVOCATE FOR
                SMT. VIJETHA R. NAIK, ADVOCATE)

Digitally
signed by      AND:
AMBIKA H B     1.   CORPORATION BANK
Location:           MYSURU VONTIKOPPALU BRANCH
High Court          NO.13/1 AND 13/2
of Karnataka        TEMPLE ROAD, V V MOHALLA
                    MYSURU - 570 002
                    (NOW MERGED WITH
                    UNION BANK OF INDIA)
                    REP. BY ITS CHIEF MANAGER

               2.   THE FEDERAL BANK LIMITED
                    HAND POST BRANCH
                    YEREHALLI (HAND POST)
                    H D TALUK, MYSURU - 571 114
                                                         ...RESPONDENTS
                                 -2-
                                           NC: 2025:KHC:52897-DB
                                             WA No. 297 of 2025


 HC-KAR



     THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECITON 4 OF THE
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE
ORDER DATED 23/01/2025 PASSED BY THE LEARNED SINGLE
JUDGE IN WP NO. 15821/2021 AND THEREBY GRANT THE RELIEFS
AS SOUGHT BY THE APPELLANT IN THE WRIT PETITION
NO.15821/2021 & ETC.

      THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING,
THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE
       and
       HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA

                       ORAL JUDGMENT

(PER: HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE)

1. The appellant has filed the present appeal impugning an

order dated 23.01.2025 passed by the learned Single Judge in Writ

Petition No.15821/2021 (GM-RES), whereby the said petition was

rejected.

2. The appellant had filed the said petition, inter alia, praying

that direction be issued to respondent No.1 [Corporation Bank] to

accept the appellant's representation dated 26.07.2021 and

liquidate one of the secured assets mortgaged with the Corporation

Bank. The appellant seeks that the loan account of the appellant

be closed from the proceeds of the said secured assets described

as property bearing No.14, New Khata No.337/1 situated at Hand

NC: 2025:KHC:52897-DB

HC-KAR

Post Yerahalli, R P Circle, Kasaba Hobli, H D Kote Taluk, Mysuru

District along with the building measuring East to West 155 feet

and North to South 52.37 feet.

3. Whereas, the respondent - Bank states that there is litigation

regarding the said secured asset. The appellant states that a major

portion of the said secured asset falls outside the area in regard to

which disputes subsist and dispute exists only in a minor portion of

the secured asset.

4. The learned Single Judge had declined to examine the said

controversy, as the same would involve disputed questions of fact.

5. We find no infirmity with the said reasoning. We are also

unable to accept that the appellant can insist that the respondent

Bank take immediate action for enforcing of its secured interest in

respect of the specified secured asset. Clearly, it is not apposite to

entertain the writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of

India, for the relief as sought.

6. The appeal is, accordingly, dismissed.

NC: 2025:KHC:52897-DB

HC-KAR

7. The pending interlocutory application also stands disposed

of.

Sd/-

(VIBHU BAKHRU) CHIEF JUSTICE

Sd/-

(C.M. POONACHA) JUDGE

AHB List No.: 1 Sl No.: 7