- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:10866 WP No. 2635 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF MARCH, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA WRIT PETITION NO. 2635 OF 2025 (GM-RES) BETWEEN: T.J. RAGHAVENDRA MURTHY, AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS, NO.1088, SRIVEN MANSION, NEAR MANIPAL HOSPITAL, BEML, 5TH STAGE, RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR, BENGALURU - 560 098. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. RUDRABHUSHAN C.B., ADVOCATE) AND: THE AUTHORIZED OFFICER, BANK OF BARODA, VANI VILAS ROAD BRANCH, NO.69, KANAKAPURA ROAD, V.V. PURAM, BASAVANAGUDI, BENGALURU - 560 004, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF MANAGER. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. PRAKASHA HEGDE K., ADVOCATE) THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE QUASH/SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED DEMAND NOTICE DATED 23.12.2024 VIDE ANNX-A. Digitally signed by NAGAVENI Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:10866 WP No. 2635 of 2025 THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA ORAL ORDER Heard Sri. Rudrabhushan C.B., learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, Sri. Prakash Hegde K., learned counsel appearing for the respondent and have perused the material on record. 2. The petitioner is before this Court calling in question a Demand Notice issued to the petitioner under Section 13(2) of the SARFAESI Act, 2002 alleging that the outstanding amount is about Rs.98,78,900.10/-. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that substantial amounts have been paid to the tune of Rs.24.00 lakhs and the account of the petitioner ought to have been regularized. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent - Bank submits that it is an overdraft account and overdraft account unless paid in full cannot be regularized. Be those submissions as they are. - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:10866 WP No. 2635 of 2025 5. The petitioner has submitted his reply to a notice under Section 13(2) as obtaining under Section 13(3) of the SARFAESI Act, 2002 and no further proceedings have come about at the hands of the Bank. 6. In the event the Bank could pass any order that the petitioner could become aggrieved of, the petitioner shall avail of all remedies available to him in law. 7. It is needless to observe that the Bank would communicate all the orders that are passed and if need be, strike a dialogue towards settlement of the dispute between the two. With the aforesaid observations, the petition stands disposed. Ordered accordingly. Sd/- (M.NAGAPRASANNA) JUDGE SJK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 31