Karnataka High Court
WP/14955/2022 of SRI K P THOMAS Vs CANARA BANK on 6 October 2026
2026:KHC:55433
CNR: KAHC010339532022 NC: 2026:KHC:55433 WP No. 14955 of 2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM WRIT PETITION NO. 14955 OF 2022 (GM-DRT) BETWEEN: 1. SRI. K.P.THOMAS S/O LATE K.C.PHILIP
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM
WRIT PETITION NO. 14955 OF 2022 (GM-DRT)
BETWEEN:
1.
SRI. K.P.THOMAS
S/O LATE K.C.PHILIP
AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS
R/AT: BOLLA MANE
AJEKAR MARNE VILLAGE
KARKALA TALUK
UDUPI DISTRICT-574 104.
…PETITIONER
(BY SRI. NAGARAJA HEGDE, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1.
CANARA BANK
MUNIYAL BRANCH
3 BY 92, DINESH SADAN
MANGALORE AGUMBE ROAD
MUNIYAL, KARKALA TALUK
UDUPI DISTRICT
REP BY AUTHORIZED OFFICER
2.
M/S St.MARY'S
NO.3-95, KURSUKATTE ROAD
AJEKARU POST
KARKALA TALUK
UDUPI DISTRICT-574 104
REP BY ITS PROPRIETOR
MR. SANDEEP K.T.
S/O K.P.THOMAS
AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS
Verified
HC-KAR
Page 1 of 3
R/AT: BOLLA MANE
AJEKAR MARNE VILLAGE
KARKALA TALUK
UDUPI DISTRICT-574 104.
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT. CHITHRA NIRMALA P., ADVOCATE FOR R1)
THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF
THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE WRIT OF
CERTIORARI OR ANY OTHER APPROPRIATE WRIT OR ORDER
QUASHING THE SALE NOTICE DATED 22.06.2022 ISSUED BY
THE
RESPONDENT
BANK
TO
THE
PETITIONER
IN
NO.67/ROU2/REC/2022, WHICH IS PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE- A AND ETC.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM
ORAL ORDER
The captioned petition is filed by the default guarantor questioning the impugned sale notice dated 22.06.2022 issued under the provisions of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (hereinafter referred to as 'SARFAESI Act') by respondent no.1-Bank as per Annexure-A.
Verified
HC-KAR
Page 2 of 3
2. Despite consistent view taken by the Hon'ble Apex Court not to grant any indulgence in actions contemplated by the secured creditor under the provisions of SARFAESI Act, however, this Court granted some indulgence and stalled the recovery proceedings subject to petitioner depositing 30% of the amount due.
3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that this interim order is not complied.
4. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent- Bank brings to the notice of this Court that auction is conducted pursuant to the application allowed by the Debts Recovery Tribunal in O.A.No.1223/2023.
5. In view of statement made by the learned counsel appearing for the respondent-bank, since auction is concluded and the property is now sold, this Court is of the view that the sale notice impugned in the captioned petition is rendered infructuous.
Verified
HC-KAR
6. Be that as it may, this Court also holds that this writ petition at first instance was not maintainable since the petitioner has an efficacious remedy under Section 17 of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993.
With these observations, writ petition stands disposed of.
(SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM) JUDGE
PGG List No.: 1 Sl No.: 3
Verified
Page 3 of 3
Loading citations and judicial treatment…