- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:12697 WP No. 6787 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 25TH DAY OF MARCH, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA WRIT PETITION NO. 6787 OF 2025 (GM-RES) BETWEEN: 1. MRS. BIBI RABIYA SULTANA W/O. LATE SYED EJAZ AHMED, AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, AADHAR NO. 9767 9113 4483, 2. MR. SYED AAMIR AHMED S/O. LATE SYED EJAZ AHMED AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS, AADHAR NO. 7586 8047 3294 BOTH ARE R/AT APARTMENT NO. 101, SITE NO. 853/35, ANNAPURNI PARADISE, 37TH CROSS, 4TH 'T' BLOCK, JAYANAGAR, BENGALURU - 560 041. REPRESENTED THEIR GPA HOLDER MR. SYED NISAR AHMED, S/O. SYED BASHEER AHMED, AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS, R/AT NO.19, 2ND FLOOR, 22ND MAIN ROAD, 5TH CROSS, S. NAGAR GARDEN, J.P. NAGAR 5TH PHASE, BENGALURU - 560 078. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. RAJA SUBRAHMANYA B., ADVOCATE) Digitally signed by NAGAVENI Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:12697 WP No. 6787 of 2025 AND: 1. M/S. UNION BANK OF INDIA, ASSET RECOVERY BRANCH, BENGALURU NORTH, NO.1234, 1ST FLOOR, 4TH MAIN, OPP. CHANDRALAYOUT, BUS STOP, BENGALURU - 560 040. BY ITS AUTHROZIED OFFICER/MANAGER. 2. MR. RAMESH V.B, S/O. BHAGAVANTHA GUPTA V.B., AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS, 3. MR. CHIRAN R S/O. RAMESH B AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS, RESPONDENTS 2 AND 3 ARE R/AT AKASH NAMANA, 10TH CROSS, SIT, VISHWESHWARAIAH LAYOUT, TUMAKURU - 572 102. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. DIVYA PURANDAR, ADVOCATE FOR R1) THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECTION TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT BANK NOT TO HOLD E-AUCTION TILL THE PETITIONERS INTEREST IS SAVED AND PROTECTED AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:12697 WP No. 6787 of 2025 CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA ORAL ORDER The petitioners are before this Court, seeking the following prayers: "a) ISSUE the appropriate writs in the nature of mandamus or any other writ order, direction to the 1st respondent Bank not to hold E-auction till the petitioner's interest is saved and protected. b) Issue writ in the nature of prohibition, prohibiting the 1st respondent from forcibly taking possession by evicting the petitioners from the schedule property. c) Issue a direction to the 1st respondent to deposit Rs.40,00,000/- in favour of the petitioners which they have paid for the lease as an advance and further to protect the peaceful possession and occupation of the petitioners till they are paid their money, which they have paid to the respondents. d) And pass such other orders, directions as this Hon'ble Court deems fit to grant in the facts and circumstances of the case, interest of Justice and equity." 2. Heard Sri. Raja Subrahmanya B., learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, Smt. Divya Purandar, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.1 and have perused the material on record. - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:12697 WP No. 6787 of 2025 3. Facts in brief, germane, are as follows: The petitioners are said to be tenants in the property owned by respondents No.2 and 3. Respondent Nos.2 and 3 borrow sum from the first respondent - Union Bank of India, default in payment and proceedings under the SARFAESI Act, 2002 are instituted against the borrowers. The tenants are before this Court seeking stay of all further proceedings pursuant to the steps taken by the Bank under the SARFAESI Act, 2002. 4. In the light of the petitioners being tenants, this Court, by an order dated 10.03.2025, had protected the dispossession of the petitioners. The petitioners being tenants have a remedy under Section 17(4A) of the SARFAESI Act, 2002 to approach the Debts Recovery Tribunal ('DRT' for short). 5. In that light, I deem it appropriate to reserve liberty to the petitioners to approach the DRT as obtaining under section 17(4A) of the SARFAESI Act, 2002. - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:12697 WP No. 6787 of 2025 6. In the light of the interim order subsisting, the same shall continue for a period of six weeks to enable the petitioners to approach the DRT. 7. In the event the petitioners would not approach the DRT within six weeks, the interim order would stand automatically vacated. 8. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the owners of the property have taken lots of money from these petitioners and their interest should be protected. 9. It is for the petitioners to seek the said relief before the DRT itself. With the aforesaid observations, the petition stands disposed. Sd/- (M.NAGAPRASANNA) JUDGE SJK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 29 CT: BHK