.1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGAI_,OIéE~«_:T' __ DATED THIS THE 25% DAY OF OCI0EER.201Ofl. E" 'E BEFORE THE HON'BLE MRJUSTECE s.N;sA'IfyANAIIAI'AI<IA WRIT PETi'I'EON NO.2571V1"7/2009 BETWEEN: SR1 DURGAPPA S/O LATE KHIRIYAPPA . V AGED ABOUT 59 . R/AT DOOR NO..1'E4'7/201 I 3% 'A' CROSS, .. 2ND MAIN, VENA1f'AK23i'L_I"&Y"QUfF"-- " _ VIDY"ANAGAR»_ - .. DAvANAIGEI¢.EA"':g 577?; 005-. I _. ...PE'I'ITIONER (SR1 II.v;"NARAsIMIIAN,IAADV,)' AND: ..... .TF1E EANKOF EARODA I _ P.J,CvOMPI.,EX_, P.B.ROAD ' D_AVANGERE_--_1..577 002. 2. REGIONAL MANAGER ., ' DAVANAGERE A 577 002. BANK OF BARODA REGIONAL OFFICE . . .RESPONDEN'PS THIS 'WRIT PETITION FILED UNDER ARTXCLES 226 "AND 227 OF '1'HE CONS'm*GTION OF INDIA ERAYING TO * QUASH THE NOTICE AT ANN~C, DT.13.07.09, AND ANN--D, [)T.l7.07.09, KSSUED BY THE R1 RANK AND ETC). !\§d\2'J"-1 -2- THIS PETETON COMING ON FOR PRL.HEAR1NG' GROUP THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLQ"v'v'£NuG__:__i' Q' _,._ l ORDER
This writ petition is filed impugning
D, notices issued by respondent bankdupnder S1ih.–;E§ule’ (6), of it
Rule 8 and Section 13(4) of the
property of petitioner sa_«iellll_to-Itjérepcoifer “dues of
respondentwbank. In the Counsel
appearing for is ready and
willing to and to show his
bonafide-‘ 50% of the amount
demanded kylould pay rerhaining amount
after negotiaitioln-with b*.1Vnl=;.,lfor one time settlement.
. ” . V in through the grounds urged in writ petition
opinion that in the light of the decision
reridered.~by:l’£Apex Court in the matter of United Bank of
zu””‘«.__l”lndia VsV.V__AlSatyawati Tondon and Others reported III (2010)
{SC} any order passed under SSRFAESI Act and as
well as DRT Act are to be challenged before the DRT under
the relevant provisions of the Act. When the said relief is
£/1¢~\)\