- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:41346 WP NO.52 OF 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S. INDIRESH WRIT PETITION NO.52 OF 2023 (GM-RES) BETWEEN: SRI. HANUMANTHA S/O CHANDRASHEKAR, AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS, R/AT NO.53, 1ST FLOOR, 2ND STAGE, 4TH CROSS, BCC HBCS LAYOUT, CHANDRA LAYOUT, BENGALURU - 560 046. PRESENTLY AT: NO.37, 2ND MAIN ROAD, KALYANANAGAR NAGARABAVI MAIN ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 072. …PETITIONER (BY SMT. KALPANA P.V., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE REGIONAL MANAGER UNION BANK OF INDIA, L.I.C. BUILDING, NEXT TO MANTRI MALL, SAMPIGE ROAD, MALLESHWARAM, BENGALURU - 560 003. 2. THE MANAGER, UNION BANK OF INDIA, NO.56/56, 17TH CROSS, Digitally signed by ARUNKUMAR M S Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:41346 WP NO.52 OF 2023 MAGADI CHORD ROAD, VIJAYANAGARA, BENGALURU - 560 040. 3. AUTHORIZED SIGNATORY / THE MANAGER M/S SAMPATI SECURITIES LTD., (REGD. UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT) OFFICE AT: MRIDUL TOWER, 2ND FLOOR, BEHIND TIMES OF INDIA ASHRAM ROAD, AHMEDABAD - 380 009. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. BASAVARAJ R.N., ADVOCATE FOR R1 AND R2; R3 - SERVED) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENTS 1 AND 2 TO CONSIDER THE REPRESENTATION OF THE PETITIONER DATED 07TH DECEMBER, 2022 VIDE ANNEXURE-E; DIRECT THE RESPONDENTS 1 AND 2 TO REPAY THE AMOUNT OF RS.42,605/- CREDITED FROM HIS ACCOUNT TOWARDS BANK/ BOUNCE CHARGES. THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S. INDIRESH ORAL ORDER The petitioner herein has sought for direction to the respondents 1 and 2 to consider the representation dated 07th December, 2022 (Annexure-E) made by the petitioner to waive off NACH Mandate charges in respect of the Savings Bank Account of the petitioner. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:41346 WP NO.52 OF 2023 2. Heard Smt. Kalpana P.V., learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri. Basavaraj R.N., learned counsel appearing for respondents 1 and 2. 3. Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties and taking into consideration the fact that the petitioner has no existing legal right to claim the waive off of NACH Mandate charges, I am of the view that, no interference be called for in the present petition. Accordingly, writ petition is dismissed. SD/- (E.S. INDIRESH) JUDGE ARK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 53