Prash Beverages LLP. Vs Canara Bank (Karnataka High Court)
The Karnataka High Court considered a writ petition seeking quashing of a demand notice dated 18.01.2025 issued by the first respondent under Sections 25 to 28 of the Recovery of Debts & Bankruptcy Act, 1993 read with Rule 2 of the Second Schedule to the Income-tax Act, 1961 in O.A. No. 819/2017. The petitioners also sought six months’ time to enable the second petitioner to settle the respondent bank’s loan under a one-time settlement for Rs. 30 lakhs, along with other appropriate reliefs.
The Court heard the submissions of the petitioners’ counsel and examined the record. It noted that the impugned demand notice had been issued by the authorised officer pursuant to the Recovery Certificate issued following the order passed by the Presiding Officer, Debt Recovery Tribunal, Bengaluru, in O.A. No. 819/2017.
The Court observed that the petitioners were seeking to settle the outstanding loan amount and that there was no impediment preventing them from doing so. It further observed that the demand notice had been issued pursuant to the order of the Debt Recovery Tribunal and, in these circumstances, no ground existed warranting interference by the High Court.
Accordingly, the High Court dismissed the writ petition. It further ordered that, in view of the dismissal of the writ petition, any interim order granted stood discharged and all pending interlocutory applications, if any, stood disposed of.
