- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:19214-DB RP No. 227 of 2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF JUNE, 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD AND THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R. NATARAJ REVIEW PETITION NO. 227 OF 2022 BETWEEN: SMT BHUVANESHWARI W/O SRI PRAVEEN KUMAR AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS R/AT NO.4/1, 15TH MAIN J.C.NAGAR, KURUBARAHALLI BENGALURU-59 …PETITIONER (BY SRI. M.R.RAJAGOPAL, SENIOR ADVOCATE FOR SRI. H N BASAVARAJU., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE KARNATAKA STATE FINANCIAL CORPORATION NO.1/1, THIMMAIAH ROAD VASANTH NAGAR BANGALORE-52 BY ITS GENERAL MANAGER 2. THE DEPUTY GENERAL MANAGER KARNATAKA STATE FINANCIAL CORPORATION RAJAJINAGAR BRANCH NO.197, I FLOOR, 2ND STAGE WEST OF CHORD ROAD BANGALORE-86 Digitally signed by VANAMALA N Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:19214-DB RP No. 227 of 2022 3. THE ASSISTANT GENERAL MANAGER KARNATAKA STATE FINANCIAL CORPORATION RAJAJINAGAR BRANCH' NO.197, I FLOOR, 2ND STAGE WEST OF CHORD ROAD BANGALORE-86 4. SRI M NARAYANA S/O LATE MUNISHAMAPPA MAJOR IN AGE R/O NO.177/1, 2ND MAIN 2ND CROSS, BOVIPALYA MAHALAKSHMIPURAM BANGALORE-560086 5. M/S PRECISION ENGINEERING WORKS HAVING ITS OFFICE AT NO.177/1 2ND MAIN, 2ND CROSS, BOVIPALYA MAHALAKSHMIPURAM BANGALORE-560086 REPRESENTED BY ITS PARTNER SRI M NARAYANA 6. SMT A LAKSHMI RAVI KUMAR D/O SRI P RAVIKUMAR AGED ABOUT 42 EYARS R/A GOWRAV NAGAR PUTTENAHALLI J P NAGAR 7TH PHASE BANGALORE-560078 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. GURURAJ JOSHI, ADVOCATE FOR R1 TO R3; R4 AND R6 ARE SERVED; V/O DATED 06.01.2023 NOTICE TO R5 IS D/W) - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:19214-DB RP No. 227 of 2022 THIS REVIEW PETITION IS FILED UNDER ORDER 47 RULE 1 R/W SECTION 114 OF CPC, PRAYING TO REVIEW THE ORDER DATED 06/01/2021 PASSED BY THIS HON'BLE COURT IN W.A.NO.620/2009 AND PASS APPROPRIATE ORDER. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD and HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R. NATARAJ ORAL ORDER (PER: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD) The petitioner is the fifth respondent in the writ appeal proceedings in W. A. No.620/2009, which is disposed of on 06.01.2021 directing the first respondent [KSFC] to refund the sale consideration and the expenses incurred by the sixth respondent while interfering with the order dated 28.01.2009 in W. P. No.16643/2005. The petitioner is also reserved with liberty. 2. In the present proceedings, this Court has permitted the concerned from the KSFC to file an affidavit, and in terms of such liberty, an Assistant General Manager, Rajajinagar Rural Branch, KSFC - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:19214-DB RP No. 227 of 2022 has filed an affidavit stating inter alia that KSFC holds a sum of Rs.8,00,000/- and that will be deposited with this Court to be paid either to the petitioner or to the sixth respondent. 3. In continuation of this affidavit, Mr. Gururaj Joshi, the learned counsel for the KSFC and its Officers, places on record a memo along with the Demand Draft dated 20.05.2025 drawn on Canara Bank in favour of the Registrar of this Court for a sum of Rs.8,00,000/-. Mr. M. R. Rajagopal, the learned Senior counsel for the petitioner, submits that the petitioner would be entitled for this amount and not the sixth respondent because the fourth respondent, who has received the entire consideration is not affected, and therefore, she has not prosecuted the proceedings. 4. This Court finds this submission fair and reasonable. Admittedly, the sixth respondent has executed the sale deed in favour of the petitioner, - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:19214-DB RP No. 227 of 2022 which is quashed, and it is the petitioner, who has prosecuted the proceedings even after this Court's order in the writ appeal. Further, the petitioner is reserved with liberty to recover the sale consideration from the sixth respondent. Hence, the revision petition stands disposed of directing the Registry to en-cash the pay order drawn in the subject Demand Draft dated 20.05.2025 filed into the Court today, and subject to the petitioner furnishing necessary identity and account details, to transfer the same in favour of the petitioner observing that this conclusion cannot foreclose any proceedings that the petitioner may be entitled to in law to prosecute against the sixth respondent. Sd/- (B M SHYAM PRASAD) JUDGE Sd/- (R. NATARAJ) JUDGE RB