- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:25641 WP No. 20377 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 14TH DAY OF JULY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S SUNIL DUTT YADAV WRIT PETITION NO. 20377 OF 2025 (GM-RES) BETWEEN: ICICI HOME FINANCE YESHWANTHPUR BRANCH REP. BY CHITRESH BANAN S/O SHIVANAND BANAN, AGE 32 YEARS, O/AT NO.432,3RD FLOOR, 7TH MAIN ROAD, HRBR LAYOUT, 1ST BLOCK, KALYAN NAGAR, BENGALURU-560043 …PETITIONER (BY SRI. NANDISH PATIL, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. MR MUNIRATHINAM VIJAY KUMAR S/O. MUNIRATHINAM NO. 479, 12TH CROSS BTS MAIN ROAD, WILSON GARDEN BANGALORE-560 027. ALSO AT SITE NO. 956, 1ST MAIN ROAD KORAMANGALA 1ST BLOCK BANGALORE-560 034. 2. MR. RAHUL VINAY S/O. VIJAY KUMAR NO. 479, 12TH CROSS BTS MAIN ROAD, WILSON GARDEN BANGALORE-560 027. Digitally signed by PRAKASH N Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:25641 WP No. 20377 of 2025 ALSO AT SITE NO. 956, 1ST MAIN ROAD KORAMANGALA 1ST BLOCK BANGALORE-560 034. 3. MRS. NIKITHA RAHUL VINAY W/O. RAHUL VINAY NO. 479, 12TH CROSS BTS MAIN ROAD, WILSON GARDEN BANGALORE-560 027. ALSO AT SITE NO. 956, 1ST MAIN ROAD KORAMANGALA 1ST BLOCK BANGALORE-560 034. …RESPONDENTS (NOTICE TO RESPONDENTS IS DISPENSED WITH) THIS WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA R/W 528 OF BNSS, 2023, IS FILED PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER DTD. 05.04.2025 PASSED BY THE COURT OF 39TH ACJM, BENGALURU IN CRL.MISC.10745/2024 VIDE ANNX-B IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. DIRECT THE 39TH ADDITIONAL CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, BENGALURU TO PASS AN ORDER TO TAKE POSSESSION OF THE SCHEDULE PROPERTY AS PRAYED FOR IN THE APPLICATION UNDER SECTION 14 OF THE SARFAESI ACT IN CRL. MISC 10745/2024. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S SUNIL DUTT YADAV ORAL ORDER The petitioner has sought for issuance of writ of certiorari to set aside the order dated 5.4.2025 at Annexure-B passed in Crl.Misc.No.10745/2024. It is pointed out that the application filed under Section 14 of the Securitization and Reconstruction - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:25641 WP No. 20377 of 2025 of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (for short `SARFAESI Act') has been rejected by making observation at para-5, which is contrary to the records. Para-5 passed in Crl.Misc.No.1074/2024 reads as follows: ”5. But in the file case there is postal receipts and RPAD to believe the possession notice was sent to the respondents and published the same in the daily news papers accordingly. On perusal of the entire records the colour xeroxed documents are found in the case file produced by the petitioner advocate. But there are no original documents to prove the respondent had received the possession notice to clear the loan. Accordingly to the SARFAESI Act, possession notice, postal receipt and RPAD cover both are very important to prove that the notice was sent and received by the intended recipient. Hence, the petitioner has not made out a case seeking for an order under SARFAESI Act for obtaining possession. Hence, I proceed to pass the following: ORDER The petition filed by the petitioner Bank U/sec.14 of SARFAESI Act is hereby rejected." 2. It would indicate that the Trial Court has recorded the finding that no original documents have been produced to indicate that the respondent had received possession certificate - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:25641 WP No. 20377 of 2025 to clear the loan. It was further noticed by the Trial Court observed that postal receipt and RPAD cover are necessary documents and appear to indicate that the same have not been produced. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner pointed out that what was produced before the trial Court was the receipt for having issued the demand notice at Annexure-D, and the office copy of which was produced. Further the delivery manifest certified by the Post Master was also produced before the Trial Court. 4. Perused the copies of these documents. 5. Petitioner requests one more opportunity to place their case before the Court. If such contention is to be accepted, the finding by the Trial Court at para-5 appears to be apparent error on record. In light of the same, the order at Annexure-B is set aside. The matter is remitted for fresh consideration. Petitioner is given one more opportunity to prove the contentions as asserted herein. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:25641 WP No. 20377 of 2025 6. Notice to the respondents is dispensed with taking note of the nature of the proceedings and that matter is being merely remitted for reconsideration. 7. Reconsideration to be completed within a period of thirty days from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. Sd/- (S SUNIL DUTT YADAV) JUDGE BKM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 27