- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33286 WP No. 22871 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S SUNIL DUTT YADAV WRIT PETITION NO. 22871 OF 2024 (GM-RES) BETWEEN: 1. PUSHPA W/O BASAVARAJU AGED 41 YEARS R/AT C/O MANOJ MANNARAYAPPANA PALYA, SULTANPALYA MAIN ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 032 … PETITIONER (BY SRI. KARUMBAIAH T.A., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. BAJAJ HOUSING FINANCE LIMITED 2ND FLOOR, J K TOWERS, 719/A-53-2, 46TH CROSS, SANGAM CIRCLE, JAYANAGARA 8TH BLOCK, BENGALURU - 560 082 BY ITS MANAGER 2. THE AUTHORIZED OFFICER BAJAJ HOUSING FINANCE LIMITED, 2ND FLOOR, J K TOWERS, 719/A-53-2, 46TH CROSS, SANGAM CIRCLE, Digitally signed by VIDYA G R Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33286 WP No. 22871 of 2024 JAYANAGARA 8TH BLOCK, BENGALURU - 560 082 3. SHOBHA R W/O LOKESH NO.877, 3RD C CROSS, MUNESHWARA LAYOUT, MANORAYANA PALYA, R.T. NAGAR BENGALURU - 560 032 … RESPONDENTS THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO DIRECT THE 1ST AND 2ND RESPONDENTS TO PAY RS. 2,30,000/- TO THE PETITIONER IN THE EVENT OF SELLING THE SCHEDULE PROPERTY OF THE R3 IS FOR A HIGHER PRICE THEN THE LIABILITY OF THE R3 TO THE PETITIONER AND ETC. THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S SUNIL DUTT YADAV ORAL ORDER After hearing the matter for sometime, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner may be relegated to avail of the substantive remedy as provided under the SARFAESI Act. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33286 WP No. 22871 of 2024 2. In light of the said submission, the petitioner is relegated to avail of the substantive remedy as regards the impugned proceedings. All contentions of both the sides are kept open. 3. It would meet the ends of justice by directing the respondent - Bank not to take any precipitative steps for a period of four weeks from today. 4. The interim protection granted under this order is only to enable the petitioner to avail of the substantive remedy and must not be considered to be an order passed on the basis of adjudication on merits. Upon the lapse of the time stipulated, the protection granted would cease to operate and the authorities before whom petitioner may approach are to look at the matter afresh uninfluenced by the observations made herein. 5. Needless to state that while considering the aspect of limitation, in the event the proceedings are - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33286 WP No. 22871 of 2024 instituted before the DRT, time spent before this Court may be taken note of appropriately. 6. Accordingly, petition is disposed off. Sd/- (S SUNIL DUTT YADAV) JUDGE VP