M/S SRI SHARADA AGENCIES v. THE AUTHORIZED OFFICER
WP/6881/2025 · 2026-02-11
Ashok S Kinagi
body2026
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 936 (KAR) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 936 (KAR) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
- 1 -
HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:8345 WP No. 6881 of 2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S.KINAGI WRIT PETITION NO.6881 OF 2025 (GM-DRT) BETWEEN:
1.
M/S SRI SHARADA AGENCIES HAVING OFFICE AT PLOT NO.P16, KSAIDC INDUSTRIAL AREA, BEHIND J K TYRE RADIAL PLANT, HEBBAL, MYSORE-570 016 PROPRIETOR FIRM REPRESENTED BY ITS PROPRIETOR MRS.CHETHANASHRI H.E.
2. MR.B.R.HARSHAVARDHAN, AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS, RESIDING AT PLOT NO.P16, KSAIDC INDUSTRIAL AREA, BEHIND J K TYRE RADIAL PLANT, HEBBAL, MYSORE - 570 016. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. RUDRABHUSHAN C.B., ADVOCATE) AND:
1.
THE AUTHORIZED OFFICER M/S.EDELWEISS ASSET RECONSTRUCTION COMPANY LTD., A COMPANY INCORPORATED
Digitally signed by SHILPABAI S Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
- 2 -
HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:8345 WP No. 6881 of 2025
UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT, 1956 AND ASAN ASSET RECONSTRUCTION COMPANY U/S 3 OF SARFAESI ACT, 2002 HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT EDELWEISS HOUSE, 1ST FLOOR, OFF CST ROAD, KALINA, MUMBAI-400 098 REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER MR.K.RADHAKRISHNAN NAIR
2. MR.V.KUMAR S/O R.VENKAT RAO, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, RESIDENT OF NO.82, 1ST MAIN, 1ST CROSS, MUNESHWARANAGAR, MYSORE-570 008. …RESPONDENTS
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI AND QUASH/SET-ASIDE THE IMPUGNED SALE CERTIFICATE DATED 04.01.2024 EXECUTED BY R-1 BANK IN FAVOUR OF R-2 PERTAINING TO SCHEDULE 'A' PROPERTY VIDE ANNEXURE-A AND ETC.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY,
ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: ***
- 3 -
HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:8345 WP No. 6881 of 2025
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S.KINAGI
ORAL ORDER
Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petition may be dismissed as withdrawn with a liberty to challenge the impugned order before the Debt Recovery Tribunal.
2. The submission is placed on record.
3. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn with the aforesaid liberty.
4. The liberty is reserved to the petitioner to approach the DRT, within 30 days from today.
5. The petitioner is entitled for the benefit under Section 14 of the Limitation Act, 1963.
Sd/- (ASHOK S.KINAGI) JUDGE SSB