- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:37917 WP No. 18460 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO. 18460 OF 2025 (GM-RES) BETWEEN: SRI K MANJUNATH S/O KRISHNAPPA M, A/A 42 YEARS, R/A E-865, BALAJINAGAR, NEAR HEBBAGODI BIOCON FACTORY, HOSUR MAIN ROAD, BENGALURU-560099 …PETITIONER (BY SRI.I. TARANATH POOJARY., SENIOR ADVOCATE FOR SRI. ROHIT URS D., ADVOCATE) AND: THE AUTHORIZED OFFICER ASSET RECOVERY BRANCH, BANK OF MAHARASHTRA, NO. 465/A, II FLOOR, OPP NMKRV WOMEN'S COLLEGE, 22ND CROSS ROAD, 3RD BLOCK, Digitally signed by VANAMALA N Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:37917 WP No. 18460 of 2025 JAYNAGAR, BENGALURU-560011. …RESPONDENT (BY SMT.DIVYA PURANDAR., ADVOCATE FOR C/R) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASHING THE AUCTION SALE NOTICE DATED 29.04.2025 PUBLISHED IN THE NEW INDIAN EXPRESS DAILY ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT PRODUCED AT ANNX-A AND ALL FURTHER PROCEEDINGS IF ANY PURSUANT THERETO; DIRECTING THE RESPONDENT TO CONSIDER THE REPRESENTATION OF THE PETITIONER DATED 21.05.2025 PRODUCED AT ANNX-D AND PASS APPROPRIATE ORDERS IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR FRESH MATTERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:37917 WP No. 18460 of 2025 ORAL ORDER The petitioner is aggrieved by the E-auction Notice dated 29.04.2025 [Annexure-A] issued under Rule 8(6) of the Security Interest (Enforcement) Rules, 2002. The petitioner, without disputing that in terms of this Notice dated 29.04.2025 sale is completed, has impugned such notice seeking direction to the respondent to consider its subsequent representation dated 21.05.2025 [Annexure-D]. The petitioner’s representation and the cause for the present challenge hinges on the reference to the liberty to the petitioner to pay the entire amount demanded with up-to-date interest and costs at the earliest and avoid all undesirable consequences as found in the respondent’s Communication dated 11.08.2025. 2. This Court has reserved liberty to the proper person from the respondent to file an affidavit to explain the context in which liberty is mentioned in the Communication dated 11.08.2025. A Chief - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:37917 WP No. 18460 of 2025 Manager and the authorized officer has filed an affidavit and this affidavit in its material parts reads as: "I am given to understand that in the said notice dated 11.08.2025, it has been mentioned that "Further, we also wish to inform that your are at liberty to pay the entire amount demanded by us with up-to-date interest and costs at the earliest and avoid al undesirable consequences". I beg to clarify that the tenor of the above stipulation/statement is to be understood in the context of the factual situation of the e-auction sale already having been concluded with the sale certificate also having been issued in favour of auction purchaser. I submit that even after the adjustment of the net sale proceeds to the loan account bearing No.60141218919, the petitioner is still in due to the respondent Bank to the tune of Rs.1,13,45,359/-. Hence, the petitioner is liable to pay the balance outstanding dues of Rs.1,13,45,359/- along accruing unapplied interest, legal expenses and other charges in order to close the loan account No.60141218919. I further submit that the said stipulation/statement in question in the notice dated 11.08.2025 does not imply that the petitioner is at liberty to redeem the mortgage at - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:37917 WP No. 18460 of 2025 this juncture by paying the entire outstanding dues along with unapplied interest, charges and expenses as was due before the publication of the sale notice date d25.04.2025. If at all the petitioner intended to redeem the schedule property, he ought to have redeemed the same before the publication of the sale notice dated 25.04.2025. Hence the said statement has inadvertently conveyed to the petitioner that he is at liberty to pay the entire outstanding dues and redeem the schedule property, when it is neither so in fact nor in law. I therefore pray that the above affidavit may be taken on record, in order to throw light on the actual intent and tenor of the said statement in the notice dated 11.08.2025." 3. Ms. Divya Purandar, the learned counsel for the respondent, relying upon these clarifications, submits that the stipulation is not an offer to the petitioner to pay the entire outstanding dues and reclaim possession of the property that is brought to sale. Mr. I. Tharanath Poojary, the learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner, is heard in the light of the afore, and the learned Senior Counsel cannot dispute - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:37917 WP No. 18460 of 2025 that the petitioner's grievance in all its ambit must be examined in the proceedings under Section 17 of the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 [for short, 'the SARFAESI Act']. 4. This Court is prima facie satisfied with the explanation that is brought on record in the affidavit. However, Mr. I. Tharanath Poojary submits that this Court may observe that none of the Court's observation in the present order may prejudice the petitioner in the alternative remedy and makes a request for a continuance of the order against precipitation for a reasonable time within which the petitioner can avail remedy. In the light of the afore, the following: ORDER [A] The petition stands disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to avail alternative remedy with the DRT under Section 17 of - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:37917 WP No. 18460 of 2025 the SARFAESI Act observing that the merits of the petitioner's grievance, if such liberty is availed, shall be examined based on the respective cases uninfluenced by the disposal of this petition. [B] The respondent is directed to defer taking precipitative action and to ensure status quo is maintained for a period of four [4] weeks from today observing that the DRT shall, if there is a request by the petitioner for interim protection, consider the merits thereof uninfluenced by the arrangement that is provided by this Court. SD/- (B M SHYAM PRASAD) JUDGE SA List No.: 1 Sl No.: 3