M/S PURAVANKARA INVESTMENTS v. M/S ICICI BANK LIMITED
WP/26150/2023 · 2026-03-17
Lalitha Kanneganti
body2026
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 4874 (KAR) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 4874 (KAR) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
- 1 -
HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:16102 WP No. 26150 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF MARCH, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI WRIT PETITION NO. 26150 OF 2023 (GM-DRT)
BETWEEN:
M/S PURAVANKARA INVESTMENTS (EARLIER KNOWN AS PURAVANKARA CONSTRUCTIONS) A PROPRIETORSHIP FIRM, NO.130/1, ULSOOR ROAD, BANGALORE -560 042 REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORIZED SIGNATORY B.PRAVEEN KUMAR &PETITIONER (BY SRI. ANANDARAMA K., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1.
M/S ICICI BANK LIMITED HAVING ITS BRANCH OFFICE AT NO 4/10, MYTREE CENTER, HOSUR ROAD, BOMMANAHALLI, BENGALURU -560 068 REPRESENTED BY ITS LEGAL MANAGER
Digitally signed by SUVARNA T Location:
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
- 2 -
HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:16102 WP No. 26150 of 2023
MR.ANAND RAJ R.,
2.
MR.RAKESH KUMAR PANDEY S/O RAJENDRA KUMAR PANDEY, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS NO 17, GROUND FLOOR, K.H.B. MAIN ROAD, SAULTAN PALYA, R.T.NAGAR, BENGALURU-560 032
3.
MRS.ALPANA MISHRA AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS W/O RAKESH KUMAR PANDEY, NO.17, GROUND FLOOR, K.H.B. MAIN ROAD, SAULTAN PALYA, R.T.NAGAR, BENGALURU-560 032 &RESPONDENTS (BY SMT.SREEDEVI K.B., ADVOCATE FOR SRI. PATIL J.M., ADVOCATE FOR R1 NOTICE TO R2 AND R3 ARE DISPENED WITH V/O/D 04/12/2023)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO-CALL FOR RECORDS IN O.A.NO.995/2019 PENDING ON THE FILE OF DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-II, BENGALURU.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 8B9 GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
- 3 -
HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:16102 WP No. 26150 of 2023
CORAM: HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI
ORAL ORDER The present writ petition is filed seeking the following prayer:
"PRAYER WHEREFORE Petitioner most humbly prays that this Hon'ble Court be pleased to - a) Call for records in O.A. No.995/2019 pending on the file of Debts Recovery Tribunal -II, Bengaluru; b) Issue a Writ of certiorari or any other writ or order quashing the Order dated 05.07.2023 (Annexure-G) passed by The Hon'ble Debts Recovery Tribunal-II, at Bengaluru on I.A.No.2029/2021 in O.A No.995/2019 and consequently allow I.A.No.2029/2021 filed by the Petitioner, in the interest of justice; c) Grant costs of the proceedings. d) Grant such other relief(s) as this Hon'ble Court deems fit in the facts and circumstances of the case."
2. The respondent No.1/Bank had filed O.A.No.995/2019 before the DRT, where the petitioner is arrayed as defendant No.3. It is submitted that on 02.11.2020, the petitioner's absence was recorded and thereafter, the DRT went on with the hearing. Then the petitioner had filed I.A.No.2029/2021 to recall the order dated 02.11.2020 and permit the petitioner to contest the matter. I.A.No.2029/2021 came to be dismissed by the order impugned.
- 4 -
HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:16102 WP No. 26150 of 2023
3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that they have engaged the advocate but the advocate failed to appear on that particular day. Further, in the light of the SOP by the High Court during COVID-19, the DRT ought to have condoned the delay and ought to have given an opportunity to the petitioner to contest the matter. The written statement is already filed by the petitioner.
4. Learned counsel appearing for respondent No.1/Bank submits that the petitioner having filed vakalath and having known about the fact that the matter is pending for
consideration for a long time has failed to appear before the Court. The I.A. filed by the petitioner does not disclose the valid reasons for his non-appearance before the DRT. The petitioner simply states that the counsel has not appeared and after sometime, he came up with this application. With these kinds of reasons, the delay of 618 days cannot be condoned and the DRT had rightly dismissed the I.A. filed by the petitioner.
5. Having heard the learned counsels on either side, perused the entire material on record. A Co-ordinate Bench of this Court had passed an order on 04.12.2023 granting stay.
- 5 -
HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:16102 WP No. 26150 of 2023
By virtue of the stay granted by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the year 2023, O.A.No.995/2019 filed by respondent No.1/Bank is pending consideration. This Court has perused the I.A.No.2029/2021 filed by the petitioner and also the impugned
order passed by the DRT. No doubt, the application that is filed by the petitioner does not contain the proper reasons to condone the inordinate delay of 618 days. However, considering the fact that it was peak COVID-19 time and further, the proceedings were stalled from the last three years, to put a quietus to the litigation, if the petitioner is given an opportunity, the litigation can be taken to a logical end. In that view of the matter, this Court is passing the following:
ORDER i. The
order dated 05.07.2023 passed in I.A.No.2029/2021 in O.A.No.995/2019 by the Debts Recovery Tribunal-II, at Bengaluru, is set aside. ii. The O.A.No.995/2019 shall be disposed of as expeditiously as possible but not later than six months considering the fact that the case is pending from a long time.
- 6 -
HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:16102 WP No. 26150 of 2023
iii. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. iv. All I.As. in this petition shall stand closed.
SD/- (LALITHA KANNEGANTI) JUDGE
MEG List No.: 1 Sl No.: 55