Mr Harsha T R vs. Canara Bank
Held
The Court acknowledged the petitioner's claim of being a tenant and conducting business on the mortgaged property, supported by a GST registration e-certificate. The petitioner also provided an undertaking to vacate the property. The Court took this undertaking on record. Consequently, the Court disposed of the petition by directing the petitioner to vacate the mortgaged property on or before January 15, 2025. The Court further stipulated that if the petitioner failed to comply with this directive, the respondent-Bank would be at liberty to take possession of the property immediately, with police assistance if necessary. The Court did not expressly leave any issue undecided.
Facts
The petitioner, Mr. Harsha T.R., proprietor of Proworks, approached the High Court of Karnataka under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. He claimed to be a tenant occupying a property mortgaged with Canara Bank. The Bank had sold the mortgaged property through a public auction, and a sale certificate was issued to the successful bidder. The petitioner sought a direction to grant him 3-4 months' time to vacate the property. He submitted an affidavit stating he conducts business on the property and produced a GST registration e-certificate as proof. He further undertook to vacate within two months.
Key Issues
1. Whether the petitioner, as a tenant in a mortgaged property that has been sold through auction, is entitled to a direction from the High Court to grant him an extended period to vacate the premises, considering the sale has already concluded and a sale certificate issued to the successful bidder. Contentions: Petitioner: Argued that he is a tenant occupying the mortgaged property and conducting business there, supported by a GST registration e-certificate. He sought a reasonable time to vacate. Revenue/State: The respondent-Bank contended that the mortgaged property had already been sold through a public auction and a sale certificate issued to the successful bidder. Therefore, the petitioner was not entitled to the relief sought.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
- 1 -
NC: 2024:KHC:48795 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2024 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR WRIT PETITION NO. 30523 OF 2024 (GM-RES) BETWEEN:
MR. HARSHA T.R., AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS, PROPRIETOR FOR PROWORKS, REGD. OFFICE AT NO.235, SECOND AND THIRD FLOOR, 13TH CROSS INDIRANAGAR 2ND STAGE, BANGALORE - 560 038. NOW ALSO RESIDING AT NO.1645, 2ND FLOOR, 4TH A MAIN, 5TH BLOCK, BESIDE NAVAUNNATHI APARTMENT, HBR LAYOUT, KALYANAGAR, BENGALURU - 560 043. …PETITIONER (BY MS. CHINTHANA P., ADVOCATE) AND:
CANARA BANK, MAGADI ROAD II BRANCH, NO.46, MAGADAI MAIN ROAD, BESIDE ANJAN CINEMAS, BENGALURU - 560 023. REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORISED OFFICER UNDER/MANAGER SARFAESI ACT, 2002. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. VIGNESH SHETTY., ADVOCATE) R HEMALATHA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA NC: 2024:KHC:48795 THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECTION TO THE RESPONDENT, TO GRANT THE P-3 TO 4 MONTHS TIME TO VACATE THE WR
The judgment continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full GST judgments a month (one account works on both bharattax.net and this site). Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
Reproduced from the public record of the Karnataka High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.