- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:27809 WP No. 6723 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF JULY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S SUNIL DUTT YADAV WRIT PETITION NO. 6723 OF 2025 (GM-RES) BETWEEN: STATE BANK OF INDIA, REP. BY ITS AUTHORIZED OFFICER/ BRANCH MANAGER, SRI ARIJIT DAS, S/O LATE RATHINDRA NATH DAS, HAVING BRANCH AT VYALIKAVAL, NO.11/61, GANAPATH PARADISE, 2ND MAIN, BESIDE VYALIKAVAL POLICE STATION, VYALIKAVAL, BENGALURU-560 003. …PETITIONER (BY SRI/SMT. NANDISH PATIL., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SMFG INDIA CREDIT CO. LTD., REP. BY AUTHORISED OFFICER, HAVING ITS OFFICE AT NO.50, 1ST FLOOR, VINAY ARCADE, K.H. ROAD, ABOVE CANARA BANK, BENGALURU 560 027. REGISTERED UNDER COMPANY ACT 1956. 2. SRI A.C. THYAGARAJU, S/O LATE A.R. CHANAGARAJU, AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, R/AT NO.66, GOVINDAPPA ROAD, BASAVANAGUDI, BENGALURU - 560 004. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI/SMT. CHANDRASHEKAR S N.,ADVOCATE FOR R1, Digitally signed by MADHURI S Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:27809 WP No. 6723 of 2025 SRI. R. ASHOK KUMAR FOR R2) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 28.01.2025 PASSED IN C.MISC. 11339/2024 BY THE COURT OF 1ST ACJM, BENGALURU VIDE ANNEXURE-B, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR FRESH MATTER/S THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S SUNIL DUTT YADAV ORAL ORDER Learned counsel for the petitioner filed joint memo challenging the impugned order passed in C.Misc.No.11339/2024 dated 28.01.2025 by the I ACJM, Bengaluru. Both sides state that they have entered into understanding as reflected in the joint memo. The joint memo reads as follows; “The Petitioner and the Respondent No.1 in the above matter are agreed to resolve the dispute amicably in terms of the Joint Memo is as follows: 1. The Petitioner has filed the above petition challenging the impugned order dated 28.01.2025 passed by the Hon'ble I Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate at Bengaluru in Crl Mis No. 11339/2024. 2. The Petitioner is presently in possession and occupation of the secured immovable property as a Tenant under the Respondent No. 2 which is the subject matter of the present writ proceedings. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:27809 WP No. 6723 of 2025 3. The Respondent No.1 SMFG India Credit Co Itd in view of the default have initiated proceedings under SARFAESI Act against the Respondent No.2 (borrower) and obtained the order to take physical possession of the secured mortgage property in Crl Mis No. 11339/2024. 4. The Respondent No.1 had executed the said order through court commissioner and took the physical possession on 14.02.2025 except the portion in which the petitioner is occupied. 5. The Petitioner has filed the present petition and sought the interim stay order considered the same this Hon'ble court has passed the following order: "The Petitioner, a tenant in a property which is in mortgage with the First respondent is standing at the doors of this court on the score that there are certain lockers and the Bank is functioning in the said premises. In that light, in public interest, there shall be an interim order of stay, as prayed for subject to the condition that the rent would be paid to the First respondent during the pendency of these proceedings. 6. In view of the said order the Petitioner is required to be complied the same by remitting rent in favour of the Respondent No.1 SMFG India Credit Co ltd. 7. The Respondent No.1 has no objection to the petitioner continuing its occupation in its portion of the secured property as a tenant, subject to compliance with the directions of this Hon'ble Court. 8. The Petitioner hereby undertakes to remit monthly rent to the Respondent No.1 as per the directions of this Hon'ble court. Since no relief is 'sought against Respondent No.2, who is the borrower, it is submitted that Respondent No.2 is - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:27809 WP No. 6723 of 2025 not a necessary or proper party to the present joint memo. 9. The Respondent No.1 is initiating the further process for auction sale of the secured asset subject to the continuing occupation of the petitioner portion of the Mezzanine, Cellar and Ground floor Portion. 10. It is further submitted that the condition of the Petitioner is that for a period of one year from the date of the order, neither the Respondent No.1 nor the auction purchaser shall interfere with or disturb the business activity of the Petitioner in the portion under its occupation. The Petitioner further undertakes to remit the monthly rent to the Respondent No.1 until the date of sale of the secured asset. Upon completion of the sale, the Petitioner shall remit the rent to the auction purchaser as per the mutual terms agreed between them.” 2. The respondent No.1 is present in person. 3. Learned counsel from both sides that the matter does not require adjudication and in the light of the understanding entered into, the matter may be disposed of, in terms of the joint memo. Accordingly, the matter is disposed of, as per the terms of the joint memo. Sd/- (S SUNIL DUTT YADAV) JUDGE AKV List No.: 1 Sl No.: 63