- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:19741 WP No. 10568 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF JUNE, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S SUNIL DUTT YADAV WRIT PETITION NO. 10568 OF 2024 (GM-RES) BETWEEN: 1. R. JAGADEESH, S/O RAMAIAH N, AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, # 310, 6TH MAIN ROAD, MAHALAKSHMI LAYOUT CLUB, MAHALAKSHMI LAYOUT, BENGALURU - 560 086. 2. SMT. SHASHIREKHA R, W/O R. JAGADEESH, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, # 310, 6TH MAIN ROAD, MAHALAKSHMI LAYOUT CLUB, MAHALAKSHMI LAYOUT, BENGALURU - 560 086. …PETITIONERS (BY SMT. ASHRITHA.A.SHETTY, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. R.ANIL KUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR PETITIONER NO.1 SRI. K.S.N. RAJESH, ADVOCATE FOR PETITIONER NO.2) AND: 1. TUMKUR GRAIN MERCHANTS' CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD., ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE, B.H ROAD, TUMKUR - 572 103, REPRESENTED BY BRANCH MANAGER. Digitally signed by PRAKASH N Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:19741 WP No. 10568 of 2024 2. TUMKUR GRAIN MERCHANTS' CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD., RAJAJINAGAR BRNACH, BENGLAURU - 560 002, REPRESENTED BY MANAGER. 3. MR. HOMBANNA S P, S/O PADMARAJ S J, NO. 507/5, 9TH CROSS, OPP. TO YOGO SHALA, SADASHIVANAGAR, BANGALORE - 560 080. 4. THE REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES, NO.1, ALI ASKAR ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 052. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. LOKESH K V., ADVOCATE FOR R1) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE ENTIRE RECORDS PERTAINING TO THE PETITIONERS AND GRANT THEM THE FOLLOWING RELIEFSQUASHING THE ORDER DTD 07.03.24 PASSED BY THE 2ND ADDL. CHIEF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE, BANGALORE IN C. MISC NO. 1404/24 VIDE ANNEXURE-D AND ETC., THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:19741 WP No. 10568 of 2024 CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S SUNIL DUTT YADAV ORAL ORDER 1. The petitioners have sought for setting aside the order dated 03.07.2024 passed by the II Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru in Crl.Misc.No.1404/2024 and have also sought for setting aside of all actions of the respondent Bank in taking physical possession of the Schedule C Property. 2. The petitioners have also sought for issuance of writ of mandamus to direct the respondents to hand over and deliver the physical possession of the Schedule C Property to the petitioners. 3. It is submitted by the petitioners that pursuant to amounts paid during the pendency of the petition, respondents have been delivered physical possession of the property. It is not in dispute that the petitioners have paid an amount of Rs.4,42,05,428/- (Rupees Four Crore Forty Two Lakh Five Thousand Four Hundred and Twenty Eight only) during the pendency of the present writ - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:19741 WP No. 10568 of 2024 petition. Such aspect is not controverted by the other side. 4. While the petitioners claim that the loan account has been settled. The respondent Bank has taken a stand that an amount of Rs.69,54,646/- (Rupees Sixty Nine Lakh Fifty Four Thousand Six Hundred and Forty Six only) as on 31.12.2024 still remains to be paid. As regard such amount outstanding, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the amount indicated by the respondent Bank is not correct and in fact according to the petitioners, entirety of loan dues have been settled. 5. It is the further assertion of learned counsel for the petitioners that an amount in excess of dues of Rs.25,95,868/- (Rupees Twenty Five Lakh Ninety Five Thousand Eight Hundred and Sixty Eight only) has been paid. 6. The area of controversy relates to balance payable for closure of the loan account. Though various contentions have been addressed by the learned counsel - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:19741 WP No. 10568 of 2024 for the petitioners, the question of adjudicating on the correctness of the amount due requires factual evidence and such aspect best reserved to be adjudicated before the Fact Finding Authority by availing of appropriate remedy under the SARFAESI Act. 7. Taking note of the substantial amount paid, it would be appropriate that the Bank takes a stand regarding further course of action. 8. Learned counsel for the respondent Bank submits that the petitioners may be relegated to avail of the substantive remedy under the SARFAESI Act and any further action would be consequent upon adjudication regarding amounts due. 9. The said submission is placed on record. 10. Accordingly, petition is disposed off. All contentions of the petitioners are kept open. 11. The area of controversy relating to the remaining amount to be cleared for process of closure of loan - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:19741 WP No. 10568 of 2024 account is kept open to be adjudicated before the Debts Recovery Tribunal (DRT). 12. Petitioners to approach the DRT within five weeks from today. Sd/- (S SUNIL DUTT YADAV) JUDGE DHA List No.: 1 Sl No.: 30 CT : SHS