Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Ganjam Nagappa and Son Private Limited, a company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956, filed a writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India before the High Court of Karnataka at Bengaluru. The petitioner sought a direction to respondent banks (Deutsche Bank A.G., State Bank of India, Canara Bank, ICICI Bank Limited, and Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited) to comply with the Reserve Bank of India's Prudential Framework for Resolution of Stressed Assets dated June 7, 2019. The petitioner alleged that despite defaults, the banks had not convened a review meeting of all lenders within 30 days as required by the framework, thereby failing to take a joint decision on a resolution plan. The respondents included the Reserve Bank of India and the Union of India. The court, presided over by Justice Lalitha Kanneganti, examined the provisions of the Prudential Framework and held that it imposes a mandatory obligation on lenders to convene a review meeting within 30 days of a default to consider a resolution plan. The court directed the respondent banks to convene such a meeting within 30 days from the date of the order and to take a joint decision in accordance with the framework. The petition was disposed of with these directions.
Headnote
A) Banking Law - Stressed Assets Resolution - Prudential Framework - RBI Circular dated June 7, 2019 - Mandatory Review Meeting - The petitioner, a borrower company, sought a writ directing respondent banks to comply with the RBI Prudential Framework by convening a review meeting of all lenders within 30 days to decide on a resolution plan. The court held that the framework imposes a mandatory obligation on lenders to hold such a meeting upon default, and directed the banks to convene the meeting within 30 days. (Paras 1-10)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the respondent banks are obligated to comply with the RBI Prudential Framework dated June 7, 2019, by convening a review meeting of all lenders within 30 days to take a joint decision on the resolution of the petitioner's stressed assets.
Final Decision
The High Court of Karnataka directed the respondent banks (Deutsche Bank A.G., State Bank of India, Canara Bank, ICICI Bank Limited, and Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited) to convene a review meeting within 30 days from the date of the order and to take a joint decision in accordance with the RBI Prudential Framework dated June 7, 2019. The writ petition was disposed of with these directions.
Law Points
- Prudential Framework for Resolution of Stressed Assets
- RBI circular dated June 7
- 2019
- mandatory review meeting within 30 days of default
- joint decision by lenders
- writ jurisdiction under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India
Case Details
2026 LawText (KAR) (06) 68
WP No. 18122 of 2025 (GM-DRT)
Smt. Justice Lalitha Kanneganti
Sri.Krishnendu Datta Seni, Senior Advocate for Sri.Manjunath C., Advocate for petitioner; Sri. Manik B.T., Advocate for R1; Sri.Thimmanna Bhat, CGC for R2; Sri.Mahabaleshwar, G.C., Advocate for R3; Sri.Vikram Huilgol, Senior Advocate for Smt.Lakshmi K. Valdalag, Advocate for R4; Sri.Vignesh Shetty, Advocate for R5; Sri.Francis Xavier, Advocate for R6; Sri.C.K.Nandakumar, Senior Advocate for Sri.Raghuram Cadambi, Advocate for R7
Ganjam Nagappa and Son Private Limited
Reserve Bank of India, Union of India, Deutsche Bank A.G., State Bank of India, Canara Bank, ICICI Bank Limited, Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India seeking direction to banks to comply with RBI Prudential Framework for resolution of stressed assets.
Remedy Sought
Direction to respondent banks to convene a review meeting within 30 days to take a joint decision on resolution of the petitioner's stressed assets.
Filing Reason
Failure of respondent banks to convene a review meeting as mandated by the RBI Prudential Framework dated June 7, 2019.
Issues
Whether the RBI Prudential Framework dated June 7, 2019, imposes a mandatory obligation on lenders to convene a review meeting within 30 days of default.
Whether the respondent banks are required to comply with the framework and take a joint decision on the resolution plan.
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioner argued that the Prudential Framework mandates a review meeting within 30 days of default, which the banks failed to convene.
Respondent banks likely argued that the framework is not mandatory or that they have discretion, but the court found the obligation to be mandatory.
Ratio Decidendi
The RBI Prudential Framework for Resolution of Stressed Assets dated June 7, 2019, imposes a mandatory obligation on lenders to convene a review meeting within 30 days of a default to consider a resolution plan. Failure to do so is a violation of the framework, and the High Court can direct compliance under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution.
Judgment Excerpts
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO DIRECTING THE RESPONDENT NO. 3 TO 7 TO COMPLY WITH THE PRUDENTIAL FRAMEWORK DATED JUNE 7, 2019 (ANNEXURE-H) AND CONVENE A REVIEW MEETING OF 30 DAYS OF ALL LENDERS RESPONDENT NO. 3 TO 7 SUCH THAT A JOINT DECISION CAN BE TAKEN WITH RESPECT TO...
Procedural History
The petitioner filed a writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India before the High Court of Karnataka at Bengaluru, seeking a direction to respondent banks to comply with the RBI Prudential Framework dated June 7, 2019. The court heard the matter and disposed of the petition with directions.
Acts & Sections
- Constitution of India: Articles 226, 227
- Companies Act, 1956:
