Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2025 DAILYLAW 31411 (KAR)

MR VASANTH SHENOY v. THE KARNATAKA BANK LIMITED

CRP/556/2024 · 2025-02-19

R Devdas

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:7442 CRP No. 556 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R DEVDAS CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO. 556 OF 2024 BETWEEN: MR VASANTH SHENOY S/O P. RADHAKRISHNA SHENOY, AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS, R/AT 104, 1ST FLOOR, MITHILA APARTMENTS, KARANGALPADY MARKET ROAD, MANGALORE-575003. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. AJAY PRABHU M., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE KRNATAKA BANK LIMITED REPRESENTED BY DIRECTOR, CEO. BANKING COMPANY ESTABLISHED UNDER THE BANKING COMPANIES ACT 1955, HAVING ITS REGD. OFFICE SITUATED AT MAHAVEERA CIRCLE, KANKANADY, MANGALURU-2 2. MR. MAHABALESHWARA M.S., MANAGING DIRECTOR AND C.E.O PRESENTLY WORKING AT KARNATAKA BANK LTD H.O MAHAVEERA CIRCLE KANAKANDY, MANGALORE-2. 3. MR. P. JAYARAMA BHAT, CHAIRMAN, PRESENTLY WORKING AT Digitally signed by JUANITA THEJESWINI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:7442 CRP No. 556 of 2024 KARNATAKA BANK LTD.,HO., MAHAVEERA CIRCLE, KANKANADY, MANGALORE -2. 4. MR. ASHOK HARANAHALLI, DIRECTOR, KARNATAKA BANK LTD., HO., MAHAVERA CIRCLE, KANKANADY, MANGALORE -2. 5. MR. RAMMOHAN RAO BELLE, DIRECTOR, KARNATAKA BANK LTD., MAHAVEERA CIRCLE, KANKANADY, MANGALORE -2. 6. MR. B.A. PRABHAKAR, DIRECTOR, KARNATAKA BANK LTD., MAHAVEERA CIRCLE, KANKANADY, MANGALORE -2. 7. MR. ULLAL RAVINDRA BHAT, DIRECTOR, KARNATAKA BANK LTD., MAHAVEERA CIRCLE, KANKANADY, MANGALORE -2. 8. MR. KESHAV KRISHNARAO DESAI, DIRECTOR, KARNATAKA BANK LTD., MAHAVEERA CIRCLE, KANKANADY, MANGALORE -2. 9. MR. SURENDRA KUMAR, DIRECTOR, KARNATAKA BANK LTD., MAHAVEERA CIRCLE, KANKANADY, MANGALORE -2. 10. MRS. MYTHILY RAMESH, DIRECTOR, KARNATAKA BANK LTD., MAHAVEERA CIRCLE KANKANADY, - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:7442 CRP No. 556 of 2024 MANGALORE -2. 11. MR. SATHISH C.S ENQUIRY OFFICER, PRESENTLY WORKING AS CHIEF MANAGER, KARNATAKA BANK LTD., ASSET RECOVERY MANAGEMENT BRANCH 39/2, 2ND FLOOR A.S.V.N.S. COMPLEX, K.G. ROAD, BANGALORE 560 009. 12. MR. M. RAGHAVENDRA BHAT, CHIEF GENERAL MANAGER, PRESENTLY WORKING AT KARNATAKA BANK LTD., H.O., MAHAVEERA CIRCLE, KANKANADY, MANGALORE-2. 13. MR. PRASANNA PATIL, COMPANY SECRETARY, PRESENTLY WORKING AT KARNATAKA BANK LTD H.O, MAHAVEERA CIRCLE, KANKANADY, MANGALORE-2. 14. MR. MAHALINGESHWARA K, GENERAL MANAGER, PRESENTLY WORKING AT KARNATAKA BANK LTD H.O.,MAHAVEERA CIRCLE, KANKANADY, MANGALORE-2 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. VIJAYA KRISHNA BHAT M., ADVOCATE FOR R1 V/O/D.10.09.2024, NOTICE TO R2 TO R13 IS D/W R14 SERVEDD - UNREPRESENTED) THIS CRP IS FILED U/S. 115 OF CPC SEEKING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 08.12.2023 PASSED ON IA NO. 1 IN OS NO. 14/2019 ON THE FILE OF THE I ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND CJM, - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:7442 CRP No. 556 of 2024 MANGALURU, ALLOWING THE IA NO. 1 FILED U/O VII RULE 11(a) OF CPC FOR REJECTION OF PLAINT AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R DEVDAS ORAL ORDER This Civil Revision Petition has been filed under Section 115 of the CPC calling in question the impugned order dated 08.12.2023 passed by the learned I Additional Senior Civil Judge and CJM at Mangaluru, Dakshina Kannada, rejecting the plaint, while allowing the application filed by the defendants under Order VII Rule 11 of CPC. When a plaint is rejected, the remedy for the plaintiff will be to file a Regular Appeal questioning the order, since such an order puts an end to the suit itself. Therefore, a Civil Revision Petition is not maintainable. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner seeks leave of this Court to withdraw the Civil Revision Petition and file a Regular Appeal. However, it is also requested that the - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:7442 CRP No. 556 of 2024 time spent by the petitioner before this Court in this Civil Revision Petition should be taken into consideration if an appeal is filed. 3. Accordingly, the Civil Revision Petition is dismissed as withdrawn, while reserving liberty to the petitioner to file a Regular Appeal and if appeal is filed, the time spent by the petitioner before this Court in this Civil Revision Petition shall be taken into consideration. Ordered accordingly. Sd/- (R DEVDAS) JUDGE KLY CT: JL