- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28276 WP No. 1629 of 2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF JULY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S SUNIL DUTT YADAV WRIT PETITION NO. 1629 OF 2022 (GM-DRT) BETWEEN: 1. M/S TUNGA POULTRY FARM L REPRESENTED BY ITS PRO SRI MUNISWAMY L NEAR SOGANE CROS N R PURA ROAD SANTHEKADUR VILLAGE AND POST SHIVAMOGGA TALUK-577201 2. MUNISWAMY L S/O LATE LAKSHMAIAH R/A NO.346, SONNAPPAAHALLI BETTA CROSS HALASUR POST BANGALORE NORTH-562157 3. PARTHA L S/O LATE LAKSHMAIAH R/A NO.346, SONNAPPAAHALLI BETTA CROSS HALASUR POST BANGALORE NORTH-562157 4. KARTHIK M S/O MUNISWAMY L R/A NO.346, SONNAPPAAHALLI BETTA CROSS HALASUR POST BANGALORE NORTH-562157 Digitally signed by PRAKASH N Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28276 WP No. 1629 of 2022 5. BRUNDA D/O MUNISWAMY L R/A NO.346, SONNAPPAAHALLI BETTA CROSS HALASUR POST BANGALORE NORTH-562157 …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. JAYAKUMAR S PATIL, SR. ADVOCATE FOR SRI CHANDRAKANTH R. PATIL, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE BANK OF INDIA 2ND FLOOR, A BLOCK BKG COMPLEX MYSORE BANK CIRCLE AVENUE ROAD BANGALORE-560009 REPRESENTED BY CHIEF MANAGER, SRI NARASIMHA MURTHY S/O SRI VENKATARAMAPPA …RESPONDENT (BY SMT. DIVYA PURANDAR, ADVOCATE) THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE DEMAND NOTICE DTD. 14.09.2021 IN RC/40/2021 AS PER ANNX-H ISSUED BY THE RECOVERY OFFICER, DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL BANGALORE (DRT-2) AND ETC., THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S SUNIL DUTT YADAV - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28276 WP No. 1629 of 2022 ORAL ORDER The petitioner has called in question the validity of the demand notice dated 14.09.2021 issued in RC/40/2021 at Annexure 'H' issued by the Recovery Officer, Debt Recovery Tribunal, Bengaluru. The petitioner has also sought for a direction to the respondent Bank to consider representation filed by the petitioner on 14.10.2021 to extend the time to pay the amount under One Time Settlement Scheme. Copy of the said representation made to the Bank is enclosed at Annexure 'J'. 2. Learned Senior counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the petitioner had been making efforts to clear the loan but however due to certain bonafide reasons including litigation by the local residents, their project could not take off as expected, resulting in difficulty in clearing the loan dues. It is further submitted that the petitioners have made their representation at Annexure J dated 14.10.2021 requesting for withdrawal of the demand notice issued. A further case made out on behalf of the petitioner that they may be granted some time and they are ready to settle the loan dues in terms of any offer under One Time Settlement Scheme. It is also submitted - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28276 WP No. 1629 of 2022 that any default in compliance with the One Time Settlement Scheme offer could be compensated by collecting interest for the delayed payment/non-payment. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent bank Smt. Divya Purandar would contend that the demand notice issued which is impugned at Annexure 'H' is a notice under Section 25 to 28 of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act. It is submitted that in so far as the validity of such notice if the petitioner is aggrieved, there is a remedy by way of appeal under Section 30 of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993. It is also submitted that in so far as One Time Settlement Scheme this Court cannot intervene and pass directions as regards manner of acceptance of One Time Settlement in light of the order of the Apex Court in the case of State Bank of India vs. Arvindra Electronics Priave Limited ((2023) 1 SCC 540). 4. Heard both sides. 5. It must be noticed that in so far as validity of the demand notice at Annexure 'H' the substantive remedy is under Section 30 of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993, - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28276 WP No. 1629 of 2022 as regards any illegality. Such appeal would lie before the Debt Recovery Tribunal. If that were to be so, the remedy under Section 30 of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993, requires to have been availed of and not the present writ proceedings. 6. Insofar as the prayer relating to the representation at Annexure 'J' as regards One time Settlement Scheme that is sought for as rightly pointed out by the counsel for the respondent Bank by the notice at Annexure 'J' dated 14.10.2021, the respondent bank in terms of Annexure 'K' dated 12.01.2022 has rejected the request of the petitioner. Further, it is to be noticed that at an earlier point of time as regards the One Time Settlement Scheme offer that was made to the petitioner in terms of Annexure F it is clear that the petitioner had not adhered to the time schedule provided for under the One Time Settlement Scheme. If that were to be so, the question of passing any direction to the bank at this point of time does not arise. More so, in light of the representation at Annexure 'J' having been considered by the respondent bank in terms of their communication at Annexure 'K'. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28276 WP No. 1629 of 2022 7. It is also to be noticed in terms of law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of State Bank of India vs. Arvindra Electronics Private Limited ((2023) 1 SCC 540) it is clear that the exercise of power under Article 226 are limited vis a vie, the One Time Settlement Scheme of the banks and no positive direction can be granted to the respondent bank to alter the terms of the One Time Settlement. Accordingly, the matter does not call for any interference at this stage. 8. Needless to state that it is open for the petitioner to challenge the validity of the demand notice in terms of the substantive remedy pointed out. 9. It is also to be noticed that the O.A. filed by the petitioner has been disposed of as per the order passed in O.A. No.802/2019 on 29.12.2020 and the same has attained finality with no challenge to the same. Accordingly, the petition is disposed off. Sd/- (S SUNIL DUTT YADAV) JUDGE YKL List No.: 1 Sl No.: 3