- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28874 WP No. 19631 of 2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF JULY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R. NATARAJ WRIT PETITION NO. 19631 OF 2022 (GM-RES) BETWEEN: 1. JOHN THAYYIL S/O LATE GEORGE THAYYIL, AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS, R/AT NO.103, SRIRAMPURNASHREE APARTMENT, ASHRAMA ROAD, HINKAL, VIJAYANAGAR 3RD STAGE, MYSORE-570030 2. SMT ROSHAN THAYYIL W/O LATE SRI JOHN THAYYIL, AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, R/AT NO.103, SRIRAMPURNASHREE APARTMENT, ASHRAMA ROAD, HINKAL, VIJAYANAGAR 3RD STAGE, MYSORE-570030 …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. X M JOSEPH, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE SOUTH INDIAN BANK LTD REGD. OFFICE AT SIB HOUSE,. T.B.ROAD, MISSION QUARTERS, THRISUR, KERALA-680001 Digitally signed by SUMA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28874 WP No. 19631 of 2022 REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR 2. THE AUTHORISED OFFICER THE SOUTH INDIAN BANK LIMITED, REGIONAL OFFICE SIB ARCADE, NO.61, WHEELER ROAD, COX TOWN, BANGALORE-560005. 3. THE MANAGER THE SOUTH INDIAN BANK, MAIN BRANCH, NO.50 AND 51, FIRST FLOOR, D DEVARAJA URS ROAD, MYSORE-570001 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.FRANCIS XAVIER, ADVOCATE) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE STATUTORY DEMAND NOTICE BEING ANNEXUR-A IN REF NO.BLR RO.SAR.10/2022-23 DTD.19.4.2022 ISSUED BY R-2 AS ARBITRARY CONTRARY TO SECTION 2(1)(o) OF SARFAESI ACT 2002 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 R. NATARAJ - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28874 WP No. 19631 of 2022 ORAL ORDER The petitioners have challenged an order dated 19.04.2022 passed by respondent No.2 treating the account of the petitioners as a non performing asset. They have also sought for a direction to restructure the account as per the resolution of the RBI and for other reliefs. 2. This Court had granted an interim order dated 28.09.2022 permitting the petitioners to deposit a sum of Rs.5,00,000/-. The petitioners have accordingly deposited the amount. The learned counsel for the respondent bank submits that the petitioners have not made any payment till date and that a sum of Rs.18,00,000/- is outstanding in the account of the petitioners. 3. In view of the Judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of United Bank of India v. Satyawati Tondon and Others - (2010) 8 SCC 110, this writ petition is not maintainable. 4. However, as the petitioners have deposited a sum of Rs.5,00,000/- and have stated that they are willing to deposited the balance, this writ petition stands disposed off, - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28874 WP No. 19631 of 2022 permitting the petitioners to deposit the balance within a period of four weeks from today. However, it is always open for the petitioners to pay and file a representation before the respondents seeking for any benefits or discounts that are lawfully entitled. If such a representation is filed, the respondents shall consider the same in accordance with law. 5. It is made clear that if the petitioners fail to take advantage of this order, the respondents are at liberty to proceed in accordance with law. Sd/- (R. NATARAJ) JUDGE BKN List No.: 1 Sl No.: 38