Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2025 DAILYLAW 88869 (KAR)

STATE BANK OF INDIA v. SRI. BHARATH DAYANANDA

WP/30822/2025 · 2025-10-15

Pradeep Singh Yerur

Original Suitbody2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:40971 WP No. 30822 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 15TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP SINGH YERUR WRIT PETITION NO. 30822 OF 2025 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: STATE BANK OF INDIA, STRESSED ASSETS MANAGEMENT BRANCH, 2ND FLOOR, LHO CAMPUS, #65, ST. MARKS ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 001. REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORIZED OFFICER SRI GAJANAN VALU RATHOD, S/O VALU RATHOD, AGED 51 YEARS. …PETITIONER (BY SRI NANDISH PATIL, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SRI BHARATH DAYANANDA, S/O. SRI DAYANANDA, AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS, R/AT NO.207/2, RANJITHA FARMS, BOMMASANDRA, ANEKAL TALUK, BENGALURU - 560 099. 2. SMT. PRATHIBA DAYANANDA, D/O. SRI DAYANANDA, AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS, R/AT NO.207/2, RANJITHA FARMS BOMMASANDRA, ANEKAL TALUK BENGALURU - 560 099. 3. SMT. RANJITHA DAYANANDA, D/O. SRI DAYANANDA, AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS, R/AT NO.207/2, RANJITHA FARMS, Digitally signed by GAVRIBIDANUR SUBRAMANYA GUPTA SREENATH Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:40971 WP No. 30822 of 2025 BOMMASANDRA, ANEKAL TALUK, BENGALURU - 560 099. 4. SMT. NEELAMMA, W/O. SRI DAYANANDA, AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS R/AT NO.207/2, RANJITHA FARMS, BOMMASANDRA, ANEKAL TALUK, BENGALURU - 560 099. …RESPONDENTS THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTITON OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE COURT OF PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, ANEKAL TO DISPOSE OF IA NO.1/2024 PENDING IN O.S.NO.280/24 WITHIN AN OUTER LIMIT OF 30 DAYS. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP SINGH YERUR ORAL ORDER Heard learned counsel for petitioner. 2. This petition is filed by the petitioner-defendant No.1 seeking for the following reliefs: "Wherefore, the Petitioner most humbly prays that this Hon'ble Court be pleased to - a) Issue writ in the nature of mandamus directing the Court of Principal Civil Judge and JMFC, Anekal to dispose of IA No.1/2024 pending in OS No.280/2024 - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:40971 WP No. 30822 of 2025 within an outer limit of 30 days, in the interest of justice and equity. b) And grant such other order or directions as this Hon'ble Court deems fit under the circumstances of the case, including costs, in the interest of justice and equity." 3. This Court does not find any need to issue notice to the respondents as no relief is sought against them and so also no adverse order is passed against them. The only relief that is sought in the present writ petition is; "to direct the Principal Civil Judge and JMFC, Anekal to dispose of I.A.No.1 filed under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 of CPC in O.S. No.280/2024 within an outer limit of thirty (30) days." 4. It is the contention of learned counsel for petitioner that suit came to be filed on 22.04.2024 for declaration and consequential relief of Permanent Injunction against the petitioner/defendant and others. Along with the plaint, the respondents/plaintiffs filed an application under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 of CPC. There was an ad interim ex parte order of temporary - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:40971 WP No. 30822 of 2025 injunction granted against the defendants. The petitioner being defendant No.1 filed the written statement and also objections to the application. However, the trial Court has not yet disposed of the application filed under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 of CPC, on merits. The respondents/ plaintiffs are taking time for one or the other reason without addressing arguments on the said interim application. Hence, petitioner is before this Court for a direction to the trial Court to dispose of the application expeditiously. 5. Order XXXIX Rule 3A of CPC contemplates disposal of the application within thirty (30) days. The plaintiff have prolonged the matter more than a year. The trial Court has also not passed orders on the said application yet. Defendant No.1 has already filed the written statement and also objections to the application. Under the circumstances, it is obligatory on the part of the trial Court to dispose of the application on merits after hearing both parties and not to prolong the matter. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:40971 WP No. 30822 of 2025 6. In view of the above, having regard to the provisions of Order XXXIX Rule 3A of CPC, this Court deems it appropriate to direct the trial Court to dispose of I.A. filed Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 of CPC expeditiously. 7. Accordingly, I pass the following: O R D E R i) The petition is allowed. ii) A direction is issued to the Principal Civil Judge & JMFC, Anekal to dispose of I.A.No.1/2024 filed under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 of CPC in O.S. No. 329/2024 within a period of fifteen days from the date of receipt of copy of this order. iii) This Court has not expressed any opinion on merits of the matter. Sd/- (PRADEEP SINGH YERUR) JUDGE CPN