- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:4015 WP No. 1398 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF JANUARY 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO. 1398 OF 2026 (GM-RES) BETWEEN: 1. SREENIVASA ENTERPRISES (A PARTNERSHIP FIRM) NO. 40, LALBAGH ROAD, BENGALURU, KARNATAKA 560027. REPRESENTED THROUGH ITS PARTNER MR. K R RAVISHANKAR. 2. MR. K R RAVISHANKAR SON OF K C RUDREGOWDA AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS, NO. 824, 24 MAIN ROAD, OPP. BATA SHOWROOM, JP NAGAR, 2ND PHASE, BANGALORE SOUTH, BANGALORE, KARNATAKA 560078. 3. MS. ANITHA RAVISHANKAR WIFE OF K R RAVISHANKAR AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, Digitally signed by RAKESH S HARIHAR Location: High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:4015 WP No. 1398 of 2026 NO. 824, 24 MAIN ROAD, OPP. BATA SHOWROOM, JP NAGAR, 2ND PHASE, BANGALORE SOUTH, BANGALORE, KARNATAKA - 560078. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. DHANANJAY V. JOSHI., SENIOR ADVOCATE FOR SRI. VACHAN H U., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. KARNATAKA BANK LIMITED REGISTERED AND HEAD OFFICE AT P.B NO. 599, MHAVEERA CITCLE, KANKANADY, MANGALORE - 575 002 OFFICE IS ALSO LOCATED AT- MINERVA CIRCLE, BENGALURU BRANCH, RAJESHWARI COMPLEX, NO. 163, RASHTRIYA VIDYALAYA RD, OPP. S R GLASS TRENDZ, DODDAMAVALLI, MAVALLI, BENGALURU 560 004 REPRESENTED BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER. 2. IDENTIFICATION COMMITTEE - A (COMMITTEE OF EXECUTIVES FOR IDENTIFICATION OF LARGE DEFAULTERS) - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:4015 WP No. 1398 of 2026 KARNATAKA BANK LIMITED REGISTERED AND HEAD OFFICE AT P.B NO. 599, MAHAVEERA CIRCLE, KANKANADY, MANGALORE - 575 002 OFFICE IS ALSO LOCATED AT- MINERVA CIRCLE, BENGALURU BRANCH, RAJESHWARI COMPLEX, NO. 163, RASHTRIYA VIDYALAYA RD, OPP. S R GLASS TRENDZ, DODDAMAVALLI, MAVALLI, BENGALURU - 560 004 REPRESENTED BY MR. GEOGY T JACOB CONVENOR OF THE COMMITTEE. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.K.V. SHYAMA PRASADA., ADVOCATE FOR R1 AND R2) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO-QUASH THE ORDER DATED 22.12.2025 (ANNX-A) PASSED BY THE RESPONDENTS; B. QUASH THE CONSEQUENTIAL COMMUNICATION DATED 30.12.2025 BEARING REF CREDIT.CMRD-19/WD- 3037 OR WD 673.2025-26 (ANNX-A1) ISSUED PURSUANT THERETO; C. DIRECT THE RESPONDENTS TO CONSIDER THE REPLY DATED 29.12.2025 ISSUED BY THE PETITIONERS ON 31.12.2025 TO THE SHOW CAUSE NOTICE DATED - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:4015 WP No. 1398 of 2026 26.11.2025 (ANNX-K) RECKONING THE ACTUAL DATE OF SERVICE AS 11.12.2025. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD ORAL ORDER The petitioners are aggrieved by the Recommendation forwarded by the second respondent to a Review Committee as contemplated under the Reserve Bank of India [Commercial Banks- Treatment of Wilful Defaulters and Large Defaulters] Directions, 2025 [for short, 'the Directions']. Sri Dhananjay V. Joshi, the learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners, submits that; • The petitioners have invoked this Court's jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India because paragraph 5 (4) of Chapter III of the Directions stipulates that the - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:4015 WP No. 1398 of 2026 second respondent must call for submissions within 21 days from the date of issuance of Show Cause Notice [SCN] and this would essentially mean that the petitioners must have a reasonable opportunity. • The petitioners have not been given such an opportunity because the petitioners are not in receipt of the SCN sent by post on 26.11.2025, and when the petitioners were informed about the SCN over email on 11.12.2025, they have caused their response on 29.12.2025. • The second respondent has not considered this Response dated 29.12.2025 only because it is beyond 21 days. Sri K.V. Shyama Prasada, the learned counsel for the respondents, proposes to canvas that paragraph 5(4) of Chapter III of the Directions contemplates 21 days from the date of issuance of - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:4015 WP No. 1398 of 2026 SCN and that because this Notice is issued on 26.11.2025 the petitioners had to file their response within 21 days from such date and that because they have not filed their response within such date, no exception can be taken. However, after some elaboration on this aspect and with this Court calling upon the learned counsel to secure instructions on whether the second respondent, in the peculiarities of the case, would consider the petitioners’ response dated 29.12.2025 [without prejudice to its reading of paragraph 5(4) of Directions], he submits on instructions that the second respondent would indeed so consider and take a decision on making recommendations as contemplated under paragraph 5(5) of the Directions. Hence: ORDER [A] The petition stands disposed of quashing the second respondent’s Recommendation dated 30.12.2025 [Annexure-A1] calling - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:4015 WP No. 1398 of 2026 upon the second respondent to consider the petitioner's Response dated 29.12.2025 and take an appropriate decision as is required in law. [B] It is observed that the petitioners will be at liberty to file any additional/supplemental submissions before 30.01.2026. Sd/- (B M SHYAM PRASAD) JUDGE SA ct:sr