{"id":249792,"date":"2011-01-17T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2011-01-16T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-suma-umashankar-vs-citi-bank-on-17-january-2011"},"modified":"2015-11-22T16:35:37","modified_gmt":"2015-11-22T11:05:37","slug":"smt-suma-umashankar-vs-citi-bank-on-17-january-2011","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-suma-umashankar-vs-citi-bank-on-17-january-2011","title":{"rendered":"Smt Suma Umashankar vs Citi Bank on 17 January, 2011"},"content":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court<\/div>\n
Smt Suma Umashankar vs Citi Bank on 17 January, 2011<\/div>\n
Author: B.S.Patil<\/div>\n
_ KUMAR; ADV.) \"\n\nIN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BA.NGALORE\n\nDATED mzs 'I'i~:IE 17::-2 DAY OF JANuAmf\"2,{3':1V\"if'fA.'\n\nBEFORE\n\nTHE) }~{C>N'BLE MR. JUS'1\"'I'CE;' 43,'S.OipA\"i5iV:;'<__  \n\nWRIT PETITION N034 1 53V2-53\u00e9s.oOF. $20 1 db' {:;MRF;SO)*~ V 'V '  \n\nI3 ETWEEN t\n\n.1. SM'.1'.SU}\\\/IA UMASHA?\u20ac\u00a7{Af% --  \nW\/O UMASHANKAR   -_   '\nAGE:41YE1ARS " "\n\n2. sR1.UMAs1w1ANjKAR A35.     \nS\/O A.s.sADA$;;%11\\zAiAH[    \nAGE: 46  "    '\nB0TH._R\/O'wN0.29_,V._ \u00bb f \noLu'No.22~wj. 31%) STAGE\nEAST, B m-Jz<'Rr}-AI)  "  \nMALLEsHWARAiv\u00a3.;j"BANGAu0R_E\u00bbo3  PETITIONERS\n\n{BY sR1,J.AYA'\u00a7i:<:UMA,::e. S."PA'I'iI., SR. ADV. FOR SRIANJAN\n\nOr::m-O 1,\u00a7\\r*I9\u00a7;:;*a;AL1A AT TCS\n\nE s.I~;.1%'A14_:K, -FRIMROSE ROAD\n\n 4 \"V.BANGA!,J(D'E(g\u00a3': W} 7'\nO.  REP; BY ITS AUTI\"I.ORISEIJ OFFICER  RESPONDENT\n\n _ my s_r2\ufb01'.v.sU12\u00a3\u00a3s1--i, AIJV. FOR Ms. S.A.ASS\"I.'S., ADVS.]\n\nTh\ufb01S{. writ: pe*t:it:'o;r1\u00a7 :.z::.\u00bbr_fi1eci tmder A2\"ti\u00bb::I\u20ac 226 and\n\n\" 227 of the: C0ns1:ii:ui:_i0n of India. prayzing to issue a writ:\n\n31.11 tbs r1a'{;L1:\"e of {:eri':i<)ra1"i cgzaassiziztrg ithzi ()i""d\ufb01%F dated\n\n\n\n'7\n\n20.5.2010 passed by the \\:'Hi ACMM at Bem\u00a7.\u00a7a1ore in\nC.i\\\/\u00a3isC.No. 1 151\/10 produced at Am1~B and etc.\n\nTh::\u00a3%})\u20ac'\u00a3'itiOI1sC01"I1iI"1g' on for orders this day, the\nCourt made the following:\n\nORDER\n<\/pre>\n
in this writ petition, petitioners are eha11er1jg\u00a7it1\u00a7\u00a7.Vti1e<\/p>\n
order dated 20.5.2010 passed by the 1ear11e:(:1:”  V’
\nChief Metropolitan Mag1stvrate,.A   \u00a311′ 0
\nC.iV\u00a3isC.No.1151\/2010 vicie  <\/p>\n
also made to the notice  . 12.20100 theii’ 0<\/p>\n
respondent \/ Banv_k;._unc’1e”r’0\u00a7:\u00a73eeti_on a’13′{A4}”V: of the<\/p>\n
Seeuri1_vtiz,at1oI0i._–vantiVMR*e,;\u00a7beo11st:’uCt.ion of Finanetai Assets
\nand Er’1i”or4eerIieV:1t”\u00abw.of Interest Act<\/a>, 2002 (for<\/p>\n
shott the  hereintifter).\n<\/p>\n
   2.’-sV.It’v~.iAs the’t’:’a’se of the petitioners that they have<\/p>\n
axfa’iieci:”‘ia.M ftiotzsing loan in the year 2006 in a sum of<\/p>\n
 payable in 1.79 equal installments. The<\/p>\n
petit.ion__ers have failed to disctzarge the periodical<\/p>\n
0’ ._i11st_aI1ment,s due on aeeotmt of some financial losses. A<\/p>\n
_,V_3_’iot.iee was issued by the resptmdent \/ Bank on<\/p>\n
-‘*3<\/p>\n
‘)<\/p>\n
13.04.2009 invoking Section 13(2) of the Aet. Aeeerding
\nto the petitioners, they have repiied te this notice on
\n23.042009 objecting te the claim made and assigning<\/p>\n
certain reasens for norypayment of_4vV.reg3;i\u00a7:1.ar<\/p>\n
installments. Thereafter. the responden_t–,=3.iiie;fIi<'?:'—- ~<\/p>\n
resorted to coercive measures proVided_–'ii\ufb01de:'. tiie uh'<\/p>\n
and obtained an order from the:.&M;\u00a7tgistret.e" <\/p>\n
Bank to take over the 'p}ossessiotr.:_ of  " it<\/p>\n
forcibly. The Bank has foreib.}\u00a7f"'takeh eos'seSsion of the<\/p>\n
schedule property oh"  by this<\/p>\n
action;   \ufb01etitictrthwivs filed.\n<\/p>\n
3:’-.I\ufb01\u00ab.the– \u00abassertions made in the writ<\/p>\n
petition theft ‘pro'(:eti;1:1re as contemplated under the<\/p>\n
 the Rtiietswifvramed thereunder has not been<\/p>\n
 counsel for the respondent was<\/p>\n
gitregfi  11.01.2011 to fife objections. Leameci<\/p>\n
2″‘”‘.!”=se1f1ioI: vveounsel appearing for the petitioners submits<\/p>\n
A  iithere was procedure} iliegsiity committed by the<\/p>\n
  …I*f:;S}30f1{i\u20acI1f \/’ Bank in as much as the reply given by<\/p>\n
the petitioners to the notice issued by the Bar1k_t.1__;_t1der<\/p>\n
Section 13(2)<\/a> of the Act has not been <\/p>\n
any rate the petitioners were not eommu’:1i7Cate.\u00a7iV”‘ xtriethi ‘<\/p>\n
any decision taken on the objeetiio’1is’rtsiised\ufb01fi.Le2tm620i’.<\/p>\n
eounsei for the respondent’ \/ Beink’*.t_tad  <\/p>\n
show to the Court that after  given
\nby the petitioners, ,t?t;;s.:\u00a7\ufb01  its
\nviews and that he xvotilid-i records in
\nthis regard.      is iisted today<\/p>\n
before the COL}-ft\u00bb:  ‘<\/p>\n
viii_’Lear’r1eei~:’Ct!\u00a7VL1:1_sie.le:for the respondent \/ Bank<\/p>\n
strongly eo’:1ter101e,<:iAA*h\u00a7?'~~-'tjiaeing before the Court the<\/p>\n
-‘W._coni\ufb011;u;;:1iea,i:i0n “‘ac’a0′{ressed by the Bank to the<\/p>\n
o%peg\u00a3i%tior:e\u00a7fs 08.04.2009 and the reply given to the<\/p>\n
 by_’f)e1;iti0ners on 23.04.2009 that the notice<\/p>\n
hi”~.\u00ab.._’*..dated O.\u20ac\u00a7A;’1O4.20O9 was not issued under Section 13(2)<\/a> of<\/p>\n
it   but it was 21 de.m2md notice eailingg upon the<\/p>\n
_\u00bbp_et.itioners to pay the a.mou:nt. Therefore, the reply<\/p>\n
 given by the pet\ufb02ioners on 23.04.2009 was not a reply<\/p>\n
it”\n<\/p>\n
\n
5<\/span>
\nto the notice issued under Section 13(2)<\/a> of the .Aet. He<\/p>\n
further contends, by referring to the statement of<\/p>\n
objections filed and the document riamely the Vetptipper<\/p>\n
advertisement published in the newspapers”.’t’h.at–._:tiiie’_
\nnotice issued under Section 13(2)<\/a> by  ‘post
\nacknowledgement due addressed :_-to3 t1e1e”..fesi(3:e:itiA:;iA<\/p>\n
address of the petitioners wvas.Vret1ii’tiedVwit:h }th.e_post\u00e9tI <\/p>\n
endorsement “Ieft”, hence  respohderit II’ Bank
\npublished the said “\u00ab-_r}.otiC_,e  newspaper in<\/p>\n
compliance w\ufb01h the””*r’:iIes’–therefore. it was<\/p>\n
ineumvio’ezit”t’u.f3oh to file his objections.
\nAs the ‘petit,ioners submit any reply, the Bank<\/p>\n
proceeded ‘u”w.it1ri-.7the- iiieasures contemplated under<\/p>\n
‘ ‘~ ..4.,g3\u00a2e’tiori\u00ab.”‘}3{‘!\u00a7:) and  of the Act to take possession of the<\/p>\n
‘ -..res;ide;1.t’1’a.1″ho~;1Vs~e beionging to the petitioners.<\/p>\n
 heard Sridayakumar S.Patii, Eearned<\/p>\n
“..,senior’rveGt1nsel appearing for the pet,itioners and the
\n“‘d1Aea1rri’ecI counsel for the respondent: \/ Batik, I find that<\/p>\n
  procedure adopted by the respondent \/ Bank in<\/p>\n
6<\/span>
\nissuing rzotice is not in conformity wit11 the provisions<\/p>\n
prescribed. Rule 3 of the Sectlrity Interest
\n(Er1forcernent} Ruies 2002 provide as under:<\/p>\n
‘*3. Demand notice.- {1} The service erej
\ndemand notice as referred to in sub
\nof Section 1<\/a>.3 of the Ordinance shall  ‘V’
\nby delivering or transmitting
\nwhere the borrower or his
\nto accept the notice or  of”bbAeh.aI,f
\nthe borrower, actua3i3t__a–13d voitlra<\/p>\n
or carries on business  for<\/p>\n
gain, by  ‘~~regis’t.ered’:__ _”i’~..post  with<\/p>\n
   V  \u00e9tddressed to the
\nborroweriiror. ’empowered to accept
\ntlaieasierviee  Post or by courier or<\/p>\n
.-by  et=i1er- rtieans of transmission of
\n d_o.cu.r;1e11ts””–}i-ke fax message or electronic<\/p>\n
\u00ab ” ‘~ ._ rIi2?1in..serytee:\n<\/p>\n
  where authorised officer has
\nreatsoi?iAit:o believe that the borrower or his
\n“agent is avoiding the servtce of the notice or<\/p>\n
A  that for any other reason, the service cannot
\n:be made as aforesaid, the service shat} be
\neffected by a.t’fixir:g a copy of the demand
\nnotice on the outer deer er some other<\/p>\n
:::or1spieL1ous part of the house er bt,1.ilding in<\/p>\n
M<\/p>\n
7<\/span>
\nwhich the berrower or his agent ordinanly<\/p>\n
resides or Carries on business or personally
\nworks for gain and also by publishing the
\neozntents of the demand notice in two leading
\nnewspapers, one in vemaeular Ia1:r1guag:e;”,
\nhav1’r1g sL1ffieien_t eireulation in that:
\n(2)  ‘  l
\n{3}
\n(4) <\/span><\/p>\n
‘1<\/p>\n
8. It is clear from the_’pro\\?i–s_e’w–t0  {.;;.).”‘ot <\/p>\n
Rule 3 that if the auth0rise’ti..:_b’ffi_eerVsf tile gank has
\nreason to believe  :\u00aby\u00bb*etS’\u00ab.bei.nglAAat?oided by<\/p>\n
the borrower er’fsr’lan’y,fj’L–he1* reasen the service cannot<\/p>\n
be effected,’ he c\u00a7a:;ll’:<\u00ab;s.aj\u00a7:; to effect the sewiee by affixing<\/p>\n
 a eejgy at the de:11.%111fI notice on the outer door or some<\/p>\n
'Q.iil'\u00a3E:I' -eV0'hspi't:s1_0us part of the house or building in<\/p>\n
which th.eV–"fbo\u00a7"r0wer resides or carries on busiraess and<\/p>\n
 als0"'bytp_uhlishing the contents of the demand notice in<\/p>\n
f_"'twe""leading newspapers. The requirement of affixture<\/p>\n
'  aiizd pubI1'eati0r: in the two newspapers are to be done<\/p>\n
together}. Compliarme of one only of the requirements<\/p>\n
will not ameum to eernpiying with the requirements<\/p>\n
sf
\n\/ XE<\/p>\n
spelt out therein. The conjunction ma' fo11ovv'ec1V.3?3y the<\/p>\n
expression 'also by mlblishing the (T.'01"\u00a3i\u20ac'.I1tS4–'Vi'i'"}'4:'.f.;'\u00a7?:<O
\nleading newspapers' makes the intention  V'
\nmaking aut1'1or;ity very c1e;:{rA'V"'thg:1t.A .;botf1i_ V these<\/p>\n
requi1'e:nent,s have to be c11m11ia_tfVe1y co;_:f2p'1iei:i <\/p>\n
The reason behind such req;i'1remen\u00a3._of3Aaffixiure and
\nalso pubiication in t"w'o..v_1eacEing'newspapershisVhadvisedly
\nincorporated having regard to\ufb01le.–\u00abr:1V1'a!s~ti:e.. nature of the<\/p>\n
consequerlces t'h_a _?- ensue. \u00bb <\/p>\n
  ol:')_'v;'eHc:V1:ior1s filed by the Bank,
\nthere –no'1:hVing_.to:'ehox\u00a7\u00a7r'"tir;iat such affixture was made<\/p>\n
on 1:he,hot,2s"e ._of'th'e 1.')-et\u00e9ifiorlers nor any material in this<\/p>\n
 "'~reg'ard is placed hehfore this Court. Hence, it has to be<\/p>\n
 issued under Sec:t1Ton 13(2) of the<\/p>\n
.94.\n<\/p>\n
Act”-\u00ab.._isgnot?’ in accordance with the requirements<\/p>\n
“ennmera-\ufb02ed under Sections 13(2)<\/a> and (3) of the Act read
\n ,”w_ith  SeCm’it.y Interest’ {E11fbFC\u20ac3II1\u20acI3{‘,) Rules, 2002.<\/p>\n
8. However, at this stage, learned eeunsel fer the<\/p>\n
petitioners submits that his Client is wiilingte<\/p>\n
the instaiinientis that have become due, if t:}3ree.’me’37’tEt1\u00a7_4″ ” <\/p>\n
time from t()day is given. To sif1t\ufb01\u00a5v”i1is Iqoriefidee, he is<\/p>\n
ready to hand over a DD. vof  *f.:\u00e9t\\I’f<\/p>\n
the responclerat \/ Bank,<\/p>\n
9. Learned c0Ltrise_i’  \/ Bank
\nhowever  present the
\nDD. to the I’et\u00a7rese1’1tat.i0n if at all he
\nneeds fiiiiit  it is for the Bank to<\/p>\n
consider the sar1*1~e”.’=,  <\/p>\n
 Haviu\ufb01g~reg_a3?d to the aforementioned facts and<\/p>\n
 the “th_e offer made by the petitioners that they<\/p>\n
ate”*;afil1.if1;\u00a7ej*:t:et3’usettle the amount. that has fallen due<\/p>\n
 towatctsixittstallment. payable cetipied with the fact that a<\/p>\n
  35,00,000\/~ is sought to be paid by way of D.D.,<\/p>\n
 I find it just: and proper to permit the pet:it,ie:mers to<\/p>\n
 make a rep_rese2’1tiatieta to the respondent \/ Eafik<\/p>\n
enclosing the LID. ff)!” ?.5,0G,OC30\/- 2-zr1d reqtiesting’ far<\/p>\n
it<\/p>\n
time to pay the instaiiments. The Bank shalt treat’ this<\/p>\n
 a reply given to the notice issued under Seeffi<)n-4e1'~3['2)<\/p>\n
and consider the same and take approprizitfe__–de::eision <\/p>\n
accordancre with iaw. This o1'de:j"is' pasAs'ed in_V'ie\\}.: om1e.<\/p>\n
fact that the notice issued by   nz1'd'e1* <\/p>\n
13(2) is found to be d'efee.tiVe  reasons
\naforementioned.\n<\/p>\n
Hence, the writ:petitiQn’is’eacerjrgiivngly disposed of
\nsetting aside   v the ‘Magistrate.\n<\/p>\n
  to Vfmestore the possession of<\/p>\n
the premises 1’_r1znie\u00a7:iiate..iy:'< <\/p>\n
. RV <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court Smt Suma Umashankar vs Citi Bank on 17 January, 2011 Author: B.S.Patil _ KUMAR; ADV.) ” IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BA.NGALORE DATED mzs ‘I’i~:IE 17::-2 DAY OF JANuAmf”2,{3′:1V”if’fA.’ BEFORE THE) }~{C>N’BLE MR. JUS’1″‘I’CE;’ 43,’S.OipA”i5iV:;'<__ WRIT PETITION N034 1 53V2-53\u00e9s.oOF. $20 1 db' {:;MRF;SO)*~ V 'V ' I3 ETWEEN t .1. […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[8,20],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-249792","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-karnataka-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nSmt Suma Umashankar vs Citi Bank on 17 January, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-suma-umashankar-vs-citi-bank-on-17-january-2011\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Smt Suma Umashankar vs Citi Bank on 17 January, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-suma-umashankar-vs-citi-bank-on-17-january-2011\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2011-01-16T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2015-11-22T11:05:37+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"9 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/smt-suma-umashankar-vs-citi-bank-on-17-january-2011#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/smt-suma-umashankar-vs-citi-bank-on-17-january-2011\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Smt Suma Umashankar vs Citi Bank on 17 January, 2011\",\"datePublished\":\"2011-01-16T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-11-22T11:05:37+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/smt-suma-umashankar-vs-citi-bank-on-17-january-2011\"},\"wordCount\":1538,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Karnataka High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/smt-suma-umashankar-vs-citi-bank-on-17-january-2011#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/smt-suma-umashankar-vs-citi-bank-on-17-january-2011\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/smt-suma-umashankar-vs-citi-bank-on-17-january-2011\",\"name\":\"Smt Suma Umashankar vs Citi Bank on 17 January, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2011-01-16T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-11-22T11:05:37+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/smt-suma-umashankar-vs-citi-bank-on-17-january-2011#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/smt-suma-umashankar-vs-citi-bank-on-17-january-2011\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/smt-suma-umashankar-vs-citi-bank-on-17-january-2011#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Smt Suma Umashankar vs Citi Bank on 17 January, 2011\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Smt Suma Umashankar vs Citi Bank on 17 January, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-suma-umashankar-vs-citi-bank-on-17-january-2011","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Smt Suma Umashankar vs Citi Bank on 17 January, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-suma-umashankar-vs-citi-bank-on-17-january-2011","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2011-01-16T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2015-11-22T11:05:37+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"9 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-suma-umashankar-vs-citi-bank-on-17-january-2011#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-suma-umashankar-vs-citi-bank-on-17-january-2011"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Smt Suma Umashankar vs Citi Bank on 17 January, 2011","datePublished":"2011-01-16T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-11-22T11:05:37+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-suma-umashankar-vs-citi-bank-on-17-january-2011"},"wordCount":1538,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Karnataka High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-suma-umashankar-vs-citi-bank-on-17-january-2011#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-suma-umashankar-vs-citi-bank-on-17-january-2011","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-suma-umashankar-vs-citi-bank-on-17-january-2011","name":"Smt Suma Umashankar vs Citi Bank on 17 January, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2011-01-16T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-11-22T11:05:37+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-suma-umashankar-vs-citi-bank-on-17-january-2011#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-suma-umashankar-vs-citi-bank-on-17-january-2011"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-suma-umashankar-vs-citi-bank-on-17-january-2011#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Smt Suma Umashankar vs Citi Bank on 17 January, 2011"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/249792","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=249792"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/249792\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=249792"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=249792"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=249792"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}