- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:21099 WP No. 4994 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF JUNE, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S SUNIL DUTT YADAV WRIT PETITION NO. 4994 OF 2024 (GM-RES) BETWEEN: SMT. SHALINI VARMA, W/O LATE SRI. AMAR VARMA, AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.45, 4TH BLOCK, 8TH 'A' MAIN, KORAMANGALA BENGALURU - 560 032. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. V. LAKSHMINARAYANA, SR. COUNSEL FOR SRI. CHANDPASHA, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE COMPETENT AUTHORITY AND SPECIAL OFFICER FOR IMA GROUP OF COMPANIES, 3RD FLOOR, PODIUM BLOCK, VISHWESWARAIAH TOWERS BENGALURU - 560 001, REP. BY COMPETENT AUTHORITY AND SPECIAL OFFICER SRI. HARISH GUPTA, APPARITAL BY GOVT. OF KARNATAKA UNDER KPIDFE ACT, 2004. 2. I MONETARY ADVISORY AND ITS GROUP OF ENTITIES, IMA PUBLISHERS PVT. LTD., REP. BY ITS PROMOTER / MANAGING DIRECTOR, Digitally signed by VIDYA G R Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:21099 WP No. 4994 of 2024 SRI. MOHAMMED MANSOOR KHAN, S/O SRI. ABID ALI KHAN, AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, NO.56/4, 1ST FLOOR, NANDI BUILDING, HOSPITAL ROAD, SHIVAJINAGAR, BENGALURU - 560 001, REG. UNDER COMPANY ACT 2013. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. VEERESH S. BUDIHAL, ADVOCATE) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO-DIRECT, DIRECTING THE RESPONDENTS VACATE AND DELIVER THE VACANT POSSESSION OF THE SCHEDULE PREMISES IN FAVOUR OF THE PETITIONER BY DE-SEALING/RELEASE IT FROM ATTACHMENT ATTACHED UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF KARNATAKA PROTECTION OF INTEREST OF DEPOSITORS IN FINANCIAL ESTABLISHMENT ACT 2004, IMMEDIATELY AND FORTHWITH AND ETC., THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S SUNIL DUTT YADAV ORAL ORDER 1. The present petition has been filed seeking for issuance of writ in the nature of mandamus order or a direction directing the respondents to vacate and deliver - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:21099 WP No. 4994 of 2024 the vacant possession of schedule premises in favour of the petitioner by de-sealing / release it from attachment which has been resorted to under the provisions of the Karnataka Protection of Interest of Depositors in Financial Establishments Act, 2004 (for short 'The KPIDFE Act'). 2. It is to be noticed in Misc.No.478/2020, the Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge by virtue of proceedings initiated under the KPIDFE Act had passed an order allowing application under Section 5(2) filed by the Competent Authority and the order of attachment was made absolute. Further, there was a direction that possession of 'A' schedule property could be handed over to respondent No.2 i.e. the petitioner herein after receipt of re-fundable security deposit amount of Rs.10,00,000/-. There was a further direction for the Competent Authority in the event of any default. The said order has been challenged. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:21099 WP No. 4994 of 2024 3. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that in terms of Section 16 of the KPIDFE Act, there is a remedy of appeal before the Division Bench of this Court. 4. Learned Senior counsel Sri V.Lakshminarayana appearing for the petitioner has pleaded extreme hardship of the petitioner stating that the petitioner was not in the know of activities carried out by the IMA. Further contentions have been raised including that the order passed is without jurisdiction insofar as the security deposit would not come within the purview of proceedings for attachment under the Act. Learned counsel for the respondents has contended otherwise. 5. However, without prejudice to the contentions raised, the petitioner has filed an affidavit in which the request is made to pass a direction to the respondents to accept an amount of Rs.5,00,000/- by way of Demand Draft and balance sum would be deposited within a period of four months. Further, request is made that the Authority be directed to hand over the keys and insofar as the - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:21099 WP No. 4994 of 2024 remaining amount, the undertaking in the affidavit would be adhered to. 6. It is submitted that the petitioner is a widow and without any malafide intent has been drawn into the present proceedings for no fault of theirs. 7. After hearing the matter for sometime, while noticing the availability of alternative remedy, however in the peculiar facts of this case, matter could be disposed of taking note of the hardship pleaded and the position of the petitioner as being a Landlord, with no prima facie involvement of the Landlord in the affairs which are subject matter of investigation. Matter could be disposed of in terms of the following directions: i) Undertaking in 'Para 5' of the affidavit is taken note of. ii) Petitioner is handing over the demand draft of Rs.5,00,000/- drawn on Kotak Mahindra Bank, Koramangala branch, Bangalore, in favour of respondent No.1 - Authority. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:21099 WP No. 4994 of 2024 iii) The respondent No.1 - Authority to hand over keys within one week from today. iv) The stipulation in the undertaking is to be adhered to strictly by the petitioner and the remaining sum of Rs.5,00,000/- to be paid in equal instalments within the period of four months from the date of handing over of the keys. v) However, taking judicial notice that normally the Court handling matters relating to KPIDFE, grants interest at 9%. 8. Though learned counsel for the respondents stated that if the Court were to grant interest, it must be from the date of the order. 9. However, taking note of the peculiar the situation of a bonafide Landlord and noticing that the landlord has been deprived of possession till date, an equitable arrangement is worked out as follows: a) The petitioner to pay an amount of 9% on the amount of Rs.5,00,000/- for the period of delayed payment from today. - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:21099 WP No. 4994 of 2024 10. Needless to state, the order passed here is only in the peculiar facts of the present case and cannot be relied on as a precedent in other matters. The peculiarity of the facts is made out from the observations made above. By virtue of the arrangement, the arrangement would in effect supercede the order impugned in the present proceedings and also the order of attachment under Section 3(2) of the KPIDFE Act. Accordingly, the petition is disposed off in terms of the above. 11. Petitioner to file an affidavit undertaking to strictly adhere to the directions herein and the undertaking made. Sd/- (S SUNIL DUTT YADAV) JUDGE DHA List No.: 1 Sl No.: 10 CT: BHK