Karnataka High Court
M/S Satyam Enterprises vs Canara Bank on 13 May, 2025
Author: M.G.S. Kamal
Bench: M.G.S. Kamal
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC:18224
WP No. 14191 of 2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 13TH DAY OF MAY, 2025
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL
WRIT PETITION NO. 14191 OF 2025 (GM-RES)
BETWEEN:
M/s Satyam Enterprises,
Represented by its Proprietor
Smt. B V Sreedevi W/o B N Venkatesh
Sy.No.39, 40, 41, 43,
Opp. Aniganahalli Gate,
Kolar Main Road, Bangarpet
Kolar District -563114
...Petitioner
(BY Sri Chandrashekar L., Advocate)
AND:
Canara Bank (Syndicate),
Regional Office at Ward No. 24,
Digitally Keelukote Extension,
signed by Anthargange Main Road,
SUMA B N
Location:
Kolar Town 563101,
HIGH By its Authorized Officer.
COURT OF
KARNATAKA ...Respondent
This Writ Petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of
the Constitution of India praying to quash the entire
proceedings initiated by the respondent as per the notice dated
20.03.2025 vide No.561/GVP/DN/485/261/5223 under Section
13(2) of SARFAESI Act, produced at Annexure-A, insofar as
petitioner is concerned and etc.,
This Writ Petition, coming on for preliminary hearing, this
day, order was made therein as under:
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC:18224
WP No. 14191 of 2025
CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL
ORAL ORDER
The petitioner who is a borrower and an entity registered
under the provisions of the Micro, Small and Medium
Enterprises Development Act, 2006 is before this court being
aggrieved by the issuance of notice by the respondent/Bank
under Section 13(2) of the SARFAESI Act as per Annexure-A.
2. The counsel for the petitioner reiterating the
averments and grounds urged in the memorandum of writ
petition submits that the petitioner is a MSMED Enterprise. That
the Reserve Bank of India has issued instructions/notification
on 17.03.2016 for the purpose of framework and rehabilitation
of MSMED units and without following the procedure laid down
under the said instructions, the respondent -Bank cannot
proceed to initiate action under the provisions of SARFAESI Act.
He relies upon the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case
of M/s Pro Knits v. Board of Directors of Canara Bank and
Ors. [(2024) 8 SCR 140].
3. It is settled position of law that any party aggrieved
by any action taken under Section 13 of the SARFAESI Act is
NC: 2025:KHC:18224
entitled to challenge the same under Section 17 of the
SARFAESI Act with all available factual and legal grounds. No
provision is brought to the notice of this Court by the counsel
for the petitioner disabling the petitioner to seek redressal of
the grievance under Section 17 of the SARFAESI Act including
the grounds sought to be urged in this writ petition.
4. In that view of the matter reserving liberty to the
petitioner to seek redressal of his grievance under Section 17 of
the SARFAESI Act by raising all contentions that are urged in
this writ petition, the present petition is disposed of.
5. It is made clear that the respondent-Bank shall not
precipitate the matter for a period of 30 days enabling the
petitioner to file appropriate application before the appropriate
forum as directed herein above.
SD/-
(M.G.S. KAMAL)
JUDGE
KMV
