- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:16181 WP No. 7828 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF APRIL, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA WRIT PETITION NO. 7828 OF 2025 (GM-RES) BETWEEN: M/S. GULAM MUSTAFA ENTERPRISES PVT. LTD., (A COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF COMPANIES ACT 1956) HAVING ITS REGISTERED ADDRESS AT NO.6, GM PEARL, 1ST STAGE, 1ST PHASE BTM LAYOUT, BENGALURU – 560 068 REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN - MANAGING DIRECTOR SRI GULAM MUSTAFA S/O SRI GULAM RASOOL AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS. …PETITIONER (BY SRI SUNIL P. P., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER BENGALURU DISTRICT BENGALURU – 560 009. 2. THE SPECIAL TAHASILDAR BENGALURU SOUTH TALUK KANDAYA BHAVAN, 1ST FLOOR K.G.ROAD, BENGALURU – 560 009. Digitally signed by NAGAVENI Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:16181 WP No. 7828 of 2025 3. THE DEPUTY TAHASILDAR NAADA KACHERI BENGALURU SOUTH TALUK BENGALURU – 562 106. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI MOHAMMED JAFFAR SHAH, AGA) THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER OF ATTACHMENT DTD. 31.01.2025 BEARING NO. MSC/RERA/CR/50/2020-21 AT ANNX-F ISSUED BY THE R-2 AGAINST THE PROPERTY OF GULAM MUSTAFA ENTERPRISES PRIVATE LIMITED, THE PETITIONER HEREIN. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA ORAL ORDER The petitioner in the subject petition is calling in question an order of attachment dated 31.01.2025, passed by respondent No.2 – Special Tahsildhar. 2. Heard Sri Sunil P.P., learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Mohammed Jaffar Shah, learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for the respondents – State. - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:16181 WP No. 7828 of 2025 3. Learned counsel for petitioner would submit the issue in the lis is identical to the case in W.P.Nos.10411/2025 and connected cases, disposed by this Court, on 17.04.2025. He would submit that the order of attachment issued in the case at hand does not have any indication of the description of the property or the dimension. Such order of attachment is contrary to the law. He would seek quashment of the order. 4. Per contra, the learned Additional Government Advocate would seek leave of this Court to withdraw the order of attachment and issue fresh order depicting every detail concerning the property that is passed by the RERA. 5. In the light of the said submission of the learned Additional Government Advocate, I reserve liberty to the State to issue fresh notice / order, which would contain all the details of the property that is the subject matter of attachment. 6. Likewise, I reserve liberty to the petitioner, as well to challenge the order so passed, if he is aggrieved. As a matter of form, the impugned order stands obliterated, - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:16181 WP No. 7828 of 2025 reserving liberty to both the petitioners and respondent - State, as observed in the course of the order. Ordered accordingly. Sd/- (M.NAGAPRASANNA) JUDGE NVJ List No.: 1 Sl No.: 45 CT:SS