- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:7269 WP No. 30132 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA WRIT PETITION NO.30132 OF 2024 (CS-RES) BETWEEN: SRI YOGEESHA N.P. AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS, S/O PUTTASWAMY, R/AT NO.77/1, NAVILE VILLAGE, AATGURU HOBLI, MADDUR TALUK, MANDYA DISTRICT - 571429. ... PETITIONER (BY SRI AJAY PRABHU M., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SRI MANU .N.M AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS, S/O MARIYAPPA, R/AT NO.37/2, NAVILE VILLAGE, AATGURU HOBLI, MADDUR TALUK, MANDYA DISTRICT - 571429. 2. THE MANAGER, KALIDASA CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD., GROUND FLOOR, KURUBARA SANGHA BUILDING, II CROSS, II MAIN ROAD, GANDHINAGAR, BENGALURU - 560 009. ... RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. ANITHA B., ADVOCATE FOR R-1; SRI B.M. LOKESH, ADVOCATE FOR R-2) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED PAPER PUBLICATION OF AUCTION NOTICE DATED 28.10.2024 THEREBY INTIMATION PUBLIC OF AUCTION OF SCHEDULE PROPERTY FIXING THE DATE ON 16.11.2024 AS PER Digitally signed by MAHALAKSHMI B M Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:7269 WP No. 30132 of 2024 ANNEXURE-A; DIRECT THE R-2 TO REGISTER THE SCHEDULE PROPERTY IN THE NAME OF THE PETITIONER UPON ACCEPTING ENTIRE AMOUNT FROM THE PETITIONER AND HAND-OVER TITLE DOCUMENTS TO THE PETITIONER. THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA ORAL ORDER The petitioner seeks to quash the impugned paper publication of auction notice dated 28.10.2024 and a direction to respondent No.2 to register the schedule property in the name of petitioner on accepting the entire amount from petitioner and hand over the title documents to the petitioner. 2. The case of the petitioner is that respondent No.1 is the absolute owner of the suit property offered to sell the petition property to the petitioner herein for the purpose of clearing the bank mortgage loan of Sri Kalidasa Sahakara Bank. The petitioner accepted the offer of respondent No.1 and entered into an agreement dated 22.12.2023. As a covenant made between the petitioner and the respondent No.1 the sale consideration was fixed for a sum of Rs.23,94,000/-. Out of the total sale consideration the petitioner had paid an amount of Rs.10,50,000/- to the respondent No.1. The agreement - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:7269 WP No. 30132 of 2024 being entered on 22.12.2023 the respondent No.1 having not come forward for executing the sale deed in favour of the petitioner issued a legal notice calling upon them to execute the sale, which was refused. The non execution of the sale deed made by the petitioner to file suit for specific performance for contract in O.S.No.7/2024. The respondent No.2 in the meanwhile initiated proceedings against respondent No.1 and proceeded to auction the schedule property by issuing the impugned paper publication. The petitioner being the agreement holder upon coming to know about the paper publication and the auction that was indicated by the respondent No.2 bank approached this Court by filing the present petition. 3. This Court on 14.11.2024 restrained respondent No.2 from confirming the auction subject to the petitioner making payment of Rs.13,44,000/- to the respondent No.2 on or before 05.12.2024. This Court on 14.11.2024 specifically observed that if any failure to comply with the interim order, the interim order would stand automatically vacated. There are no materials forthcoming to indicate the compliance of the order passed by this Court. - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:7269 WP No. 30132 of 2024 4. The petitioner is only an agreement holder, based on an agreement to sell, said to have been executed by the respondent No.1. The proceedings have been initiated against respondent No.1, the agreement holder may hold agreement or a contract but this does not automatically confer legal ownership of the property, the agreement holder is not the owner of the petition property to challenge the auction notice. It is not open for the petitioner/agreement holder in the guise of an agreement of sale to challenge the auction notice and stay the confirmation of sale or any valid legal ground tied to their specific rights under the contract. For the forgoing reasons the writ petition is dismissed as devoid of merits. Sd/- _____________________ JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA ykl List No.: 1 Sl No.: 49