Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2026 DAILYLAW 50091 (KAR)

SRI ANIL KUMAR M N v. KARUR VYSYA BANK LIMITED

WP/25119/2022 · 2026-01-13

Ashok S Kinagi

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:2097 WP No. 25119 of 2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 13TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S.KINAGI WRIT PETITION NO. 25119 OF 2022 (GM-DRT) BETWEEN: SRI ANIL KUMAR M N S/O LATE NARAYAN GOWDA AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS RESIDING AT NO 44 DODDA MARALAWADI VILLAGE RAMANAGAR - 562121 &PETITIONER (BY SRI. SANDHYA U PRABHU., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. KARUR VYSYA BANK LIMITED REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORIZED OFFICER / MANAGER ASSET RECOVERY BRANCH DIVISIONAL OFFICE BUILDING Digitally signed by SUNITHA K S Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:2097 WP No. 25119 of 2022 NO 06. SHRI VASAVI TEMPLE ROAD NEAR SAJJAN RAO CIRCLE V V PURAM, BANGALORE - 560004 2. MR KOMAL U MAJOR NO 4/245 12TH MAIN 9TH CROSS, BEML LAYOUT 3RD STAGE, R R NAGAR BANGALORE - 560098 3. MR BALAVENKATARAMAN R S MAJOR NO A-103 ROSE GARDEN APARTMENTS BANNERGHATTA MAIN ROAD OPPOSITE AGN KALYANA MANTAP AREKERE GATE, BANNERGHATTA ROAD BANGALORE - 560076 4. MRS SOWBHAGYA C N MAJOR NO A-103 ROSE GARDEN APARTMENTS BANNERGHATTA MAIN ROAD OPPOSITE AGN KALYANA MANTAP AREKERE GATE, BANNERGHATTA ROAD BANGALORE - 560076 &RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. MOHAN DAS RAO T., ADVOCATE FOR R1) - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:2097 WP No. 25119 of 2022 THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE SALE NOTICE DATED 02.12.2022 ISSUED BY R1 PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-C IN RESPECT OF THE SCHEDULE PROPERTY. INCLUDE AWARD OF COSTS. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S.KINAGI ORAL ORDER 1. The petitioner has filed this writ petition challenging the sale notice dated 02.12.2022, vide Annexure 8C9, issued by respondent No.1 in respect of the schedule property. 2. On 02.12.2025, the learned counsel for respondent No.1 submitted that due to lack of Bidder, the auction was not completed. In view of the same, nothing survives for consideration in this writ petition. 3. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of as having rendered infructuous. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:2097 WP No. 25119 of 2022 4. In view of the same, pending interlocutory applications, if any, do not survive for consideration and are accordingly disposed of. Sd/- (ASHOK S.KINAGI) JUDGE RK CT:KHV List No.: 2 Sl No.: 6