Karnataka High Court
WA/1706/2026 of GANJAM NAGAPPA AND SON PRIVATE LIMITED Vs RESERVE BANK OF INDIA on 21 July 2026
CNR: KAHC010455342026 NC: 2026:KHC:37406-DB WA No. 1706 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF JULY, 2026 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA WRIT APPEAL NO. 1706 OF 2026 (GM-DRT) BETWEEN: 1.
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF JULY, 2026
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE
AND
THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA
WRIT APPEAL NO. 1706 OF 2026 (GM-DRT)
BETWEEN:
1.
GANJAM NAGAPPA AND SON PRIVATE LIMITED
A COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER
THE PROVISIONS OF
THE COMPANIES ACT, 1956
HAVING REGISTERED OFFICE AT 64/1
PALACE ROAD, VASANTHNAGAR
BANGALORE
KARNATAKA - 560 052
THROUGH AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE
MR. DUSHYANT UMESH GANJAM
…APPELLANT
(BY SRI KRISHNENDU DATTA, SENIOR ADVOCATE FOR
SRI MANJUNATHA H., ADVOCATE A/W
SRI TANUJ SUD, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1.
RESERVE BANK OF INDIA
THROUGH ITS REGIONAL DIRECTOR
REGIONAL OFFICER AT
POST BOX NO. 5467, 10/3/8
NRUPATHUNGA ROAD
2.
UNION OF INDIA
MINISTRY OF FINANCE
Digitally
signed by
AMBIKA H B
Location:
High Court
of Karnataka
HC-KAR
THROUGH ITS JOINT SECRETARY
DEPARTMENT OF FINANCIAL SERVICES
MINISTRY OF FINANCE
JEEVAN DEEP BUILDING
SANSAD MARG
NEW DELHI -110 001
3.
DEUTSCHE BANK A.G.
THROUGH ITS
GENERAL MANAGER
(AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE)
RAHEJA TOWER, GROUND FLOOR
26-27, MAHATMA GANDHI ROAD
BENGALURU - 560 001
KARNATAKA
4.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
THROUGH ITS GENERAL MANAGER
(AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE)
STRESSED ASSETS
MANAGEMENT BRANCH
2ND FLOOR, OFFICE COMPLEX
BUILDING, LHO CAMPUS 65
ST. MARKS ROAD
5.
CANARA BANK
THROUGH ITS GENERAL MANAGER
(AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE)
LARGE CORPORATE BRNACH II
NO. 204-207 2ND FLOOR
MANIPAL CENTRE
DICKENSON ROAD
BENGALURU - 560 042
6.
ICICI BANK LIMITED
THROUGH ITS GENERAL MANAGER
(AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE)
NO. 4/10, MYTREE CENTRE
HOSUR ROAD, BOMMANAHALLI
BENGALURU - 560 068
HC-KAR
7.
KOTAK MAHINDRA BANK LIMITED
THROUGH ITS GENERAL MANAGER
(AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE)
NO.22, M.G. ROAD
BENGALURU - 560 001
…RESPONDENTS
(SRI THIMANNA BHAT, CGC FOR R-1 & R-2;
SRI VIKARAM HUILGOL, SENIOR ADVOCATE FOR
SMT. LAKSHMI K. VARADARAJ, ADVOCATE FOR R-4; SRI FRANCIS XAVIER, ADVOCATE FOR R-6; SRI C.K. NANDAKUMAR, SENIOR ADVOCATE FOR
SRI RAGHURAM KADAMBI, ADVOCATE A/W
SMT. DRISHTYA SHETTY, ADVOCATE FOR R-7)
THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 4 OF THE
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT PRAYING TO ALLOW THE
PRESENT WRIT APPEAL AND SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED
JUDGEMENT DATED 25/06/2026 PASSED BY THE HON'BLE SINGLE
BENCH OF THIS HON'BLE HIGH COURT IN THE WRIT PETITION
NO.18122/2025 TITLED GANJAM NAGAPPA AND SON PRIVATE
LIMITED VS. RESERVE BANK OF INDIA AND OTHERS TO AN
EXTENT THAT THE HON'BLE SINGLE BENCH OF THIS HON'BLE
HIGH COURT ERRED IN HOLDING NON-PARTICIPATION OF A
LENDER IN A MEETING DOES NOT, BY ITSELF, INVALIDATE THE
RESOLUTION PROCESS NOR PREVENT THE IMPLEMENTATION OF
DULY APPROVED RESOLUTION PLAN & ETC.
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE
and
HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORAL JUDGMENT
(PER: HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE)
1. The appellant has filed the present appeal impugning an order dated 25.06.2026 passed by the learned Single Judge in Writ
HC-KAR
Petition No.18122/2025 (GM-DRT). The appellant filed the said petition inter alia, seeking several reliefs. However, a plain reading of the said reliefs indicates that the appellant's primary relief is directed against the notices issued under Sections 13(2) and 13(4) of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 [SARFAESI Act].
2. One of the grounds raised by the appellant is that the classification of its loan accounts as a Non-Performing Asset [NPA] is contrary to the guidelines issued by the Reserve Bank of India [RBI]. The appellant's challenge to the action under the SARFAESI Act is, inter alia, premised on the said basis.
3. Although all the lenders had individually initiated proceedings under the SARFAESI Act, the appellant's case is that they were required to jointly consider a rehabilitation proposal before initiating any such action.
4. The learned Single Judge examined the said issue and rejected it.
HC-KAR
5. After some arguments, the learned counsel appearing for the parties state that the present appeal may be disposed of by reserving the right of the appellant to avail the statutory remedies, including on the issue whether the proceedings under the SARFAESI Act could be faulted on account of the alleged violations, if any, of the RBI Guidelines.
6. The learned Senior Counsel appearing for the appellant submits that since the remedy before the Debts Recovery Tribunal [DRT] would be barred by limitation, the appellant would be entitled to claim condonation/exclusion of the time period in diligently pursuing the writ petition and the present appeal. The learned Senior Counsel appearing for the respondents disputes the same.
7. If and when the appellant avails its remedy, the question whether the said remedy is barred by limitation would arise for consideration of the concerned authority/tribunal.
8. In view of the above, we dispose of the present appeal by directing that the appellant would not be precluded from availing all its remedies. In the event the appellant avails of any remedy and
HC-KAR
the same is considered on the merits, the concerned authority/tribunal shall do so without being influenced by any observations made in the impugned order.
9. The present order is passed with the consent of the parties.
10. The pending interlocutory applications also stand disposed of.
Sd/- (VIBHU BAKHRU) CHIEF JUSTICE
Sd/- (K.S. HEMALEKHA) JUDGE
AHB List No.: 2 Sl No.: 30