- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:12815 WP No. 7826 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 26TH DAY OF MARCH, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA WRIT PETITION NO. 7826 OF 2025 (GM-RES) BETWEEN: 1. SMT. BANU S., W/O.SRINIVASA. AGE ABOUT 38 YEARS. 2. SRI MOUNESH. S/O SHANKARAPPA AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS. 3. SRI AJAY KUMAR SINGH, S/O RAM NAGINA SINGH, AGED 45 YEARS PETITIONERS NO.1 TO 3 ARE RESIDING AT NO.3 AND 4. KHATHA NO.387/3 AND 4. ASSESMENT NO 78, SIR M.VISHWESHWARAYA LAYOUT. 7TH CROSS, JANATHA COLONY, SHETTIHALLI VILLAGE, YESHWANTHPURA HOBLI, BENGALURU – 560 022. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. SHARATHKUMAR SHETTY.,ADVOCATE) Digitally signed by NAGAVENI Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:12815 WP No. 7826 of 2025 AND: 1. THE AUTHORISED OFFICER / MANAGER M/S. UCO BANK, JAYANAGAR BRANCH, NO.238/35, 9TH MAIN ROAD, JAYANAGAR, BENGALURU – 560 011. 2. MR.LAKSHMI NARAYANA N., S/O.NARAYANAPPA, AGE BY MAJOR, NO.1115, NO. 17, SARASWATHI VIDYANIKETHANA SCHOOL, OPPOSITE JALAHALLI WEST POST, BENGALURU – 560 015. 3. MRS.D.KOWSALYA W/O.LAKSHMI NARAYANA N., AGE BY MAJOR, NO.1115, NO. 17, SARASWATHI VIDYANIKETHANA SCHOOL, OPPOSITE JALAHALLI WEST POST, BENGALURU – 560 015. 4. MR.LAKSHMI NARAYANA N., PROPRIETOR, VINAYAKA TRANSPORT, NO.1115, NO. 17, SARASWATHI VIDYANIKETHANA SCHOOL, OPPOSITE JALAHALLI WEST POST, BENGALURU – 560 015. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI PARASHURAM K.R., ADVOCATE) - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:12815 WP No. 7826 of 2025 THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER DTD. 07.10.2022 IN C.MIS.NO.5656/2022 PASSED BY THE HONBLE XXXITH ACMM AT BANGALORE AS PER ANNX-H. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA ORAL ORDER Heard Sri Sharathkumar Shetty, learned counsel for petitioners and Sri Parashuram, learned counsel for respondent No.1. 2. The petitioners are the tenants in the property owned by respondent Nos.2 and 3, which is the subject matter of mortgage with respondent No.1. The petitioners - tenants and the lease being in subsistence, this Court had directed the petitioners to file an affidavit of undertaking with regard to the timeline by which the premises would be vacated, which is now in the possession of respondent No.1 - the bank. 3. The petitioners have filed the affidavit, which reads as follows: - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:12815 WP No. 7826 of 2025 “1. We submit that we are the Petitioner in the above case, and we acquainted with the facts of the case, hence we swearing to this affidavit. 2. We submit that we are the tenants under respondent No.2 and 3 and the 1st Respondent has trying to dispossess our possession, hence we approach this Hon'ble court and matter posted on 25.03.2025 and this Hon'ble Court directed me to file undertaking affidavit, hence this affidavit. 3. We submit that the Respondent No.2 and 3 undertook to clear the dispute with Respondent No.1 and as per the assurance we are in possession and if the Respondent No.2 and 3 not clear the dispute we will vacate the premises within three months from today. 4. We declare that this is our Name signature and swear to these contents of this Affidavit.” The petitioners have sought 3 months time to vacate the premises, which is unreasonable. Therefore, I deem it appropriate to grant 8 weeks from today to the petitioners to vacate the premises. 4. It is made clear that the petitioners shall not file any application before this Court seeking extension of time and they shall vacate the premises as directed, within 8 weeks from today. - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:12815 WP No. 7826 of 2025 5. With these observations and directions, the petition stands disposed. Ordered accordingly. Sd/- (M.NAGAPRASANNA) JUDGE NVJ List No.: 1 Sl No.: 24