SMT VANITHA G v. SRI LAKSHMI MAHILA SAHAKARA BANK NIYAMITHA
WP/30607/2025 · 2025-11-21
Umesh M Adiga
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 57548 (KAR) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 57548 (KAR) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
- 1 -
HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:48300 WP No. 30607 of 2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE UMESH M ADIGA WRIT PETITION NO. 30607 OF 2025 (GM-DRT) BETWEEN:
1.
SMT. VANITHA G W/O. LATE. GANGADHAR, AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS
2.
KUM. NIDHI G D/O LATE. GANGADHAR, AGED ABOUT 20 YEARS
BOTH RESIDING AT NO. 208, 3RD MAIN ROAD, 1ST BLOCK, 2ND CROSS, AYYAPPANAGAR CROSS, BANGALORE NORTH, KRISHNARAJAPURAM, BANGALORE, KARNATAKA - 560 036 …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. SUJAY H.V, ADVOCATE) AND:
SRI. LAKSHMI MAHILA SAHAKARA BANK NIYAMITHA REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORIZED SIGNATORY OFFICE AT LAKSHMI SADANA, NO. 3,4, EAST ANJANEYA TEMPLE STREET, BASAVANAGUDI, BANGALORE - 560 004. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. JAGADEESHA S, ADVOCATE)
Digitally signed by ANNAPURNA G Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
- 2 -
HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:48300 WP No. 30607 of 2025
THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE PUBLIC NOTICE DATED 30.08.2025 NO.SLMSBN/277/2025-26 UNDER SECTION 13(4) OF SARFAESI ACT, 2002 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT WHICH IS PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-A IN SO FAR AS THE PETITIONER IS CONCERNED.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY,
ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE UMESH M ADIGA
ORAL ORDER
Learned counsel for the petitioners is present.
2. The petitioners have not complied with the condition imposed while granting the order directing deposit of 25% of the outstanding amount. Learned counsel for the respondent on instruction submits that the sale notice was issued on 30.08.2025. But on that day there were no bidders to the auction. Therefore, the bank has to take fresh steps for sale of the property. In view of these developments, the cause of action may not survive.
- 3 -
HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:48300 WP No. 30607 of 2025
3.
Learned counsel for the petitioners has filed a memo informing that the petitioners have deposited a sum of Rs.50,000/- on 14.11.2025 and Rs.4,00,000/- on
20.11.2025.
4. The petitioners have filed this petition under Sections 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, praying for the following relief:
"i) Issue writ of certiorari quashing the Public Notice Dated: 30.08.2025, No. SLMSBN/277/2025- 2026 under Section 13(4) of SARFAESI act, 2002 issued by the respondent which is produced at ANNEXURE-A. In So far as the Petitioner is concerned."
5. In view of the submission of learned counsel for the respondent, the cause of action does not survive.
6.
Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that another copy of the sale notice has been served on the petitioners. It is a different and distinct cause of action that cannot be considered in the present writ petition,
- 4 -
HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:48300 WP No. 30607 of 2025
since the prayer is challenged to the sale notice dated
30.08.2025. In view of these reasons, the writ petition does not survive for consideration. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of.
Sd/- (UMESH M ADIGA) JUDGE
AMA List No.: 3 Sl No.: 2