- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:52466 WP No. 31001 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI WRIT PETITION NO. 31001 OF 2025 (GM-DRT) BETWEEN: 1. MR. ARUN KUMAR R. (BORROWER) S/O. RADHAKRISHNAN, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS NO:339/1, 10TH CROSS, VINAYAKA TEMPLE STREET, SWARNANAGAR, OPPOSITE GANESH TEMPLE, ROBERTSONPET, BANGARPET, KOLAR DISTRICT-563 122. 2. SMT. SARANAYA (CO BORROWER) W/O. ARUNKUMAR .R, AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS, NO: 339/1, 10TH CROSS, VINAYAKA TEMPLE STREET, SWARNANAGAR, OPPOSITE GANESH TEMPLE, ROBERTSONPET, BANGARPET, KOLAR DISTRICT. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. NARENDRA GOWDA, ADVOCATE) Digitally signed by MEGHA MOHAN Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:52466 WP No. 31001 of 2025 AND: 1. TRUHOME FINANCE LIMITED, (FORMERLY SHRIRAM HOUSING FINANCE LIMITED) SRINIVASA TOWER, 1ST FLOOR, DOOR NO:5, OLD NO:11, 2ND LANE, CENATOPH ROAD, ALWARPET, TEYNAMPET, TAMILNADU, CHENNAI-600 018. REP BY ITS AUTHORIZED SIGNATORY. 2. TRUHOME FINANCE LTD., BRANCH OFFICE-AT GROUND FLOOR, NO:96, R.B. MANOR, 20TH MAIN ROAD, 2ND BLOCK, RAJAJINAGAR, BANGALORE-560 010. REPRESENTED BY ITS REGIONAL MANAGER AND AUTHORIZED OFFICER. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. K.V. LOKESH, ADVOCATE; C/R (CP.NO.20164/2025)) THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DTD. 06.09.2025 MADE IN CRL.MISC.NO.1235/2025 ON PASSED BY THE CJM RURAL COURT, AT BENGALURU OF THE VIDE ANNEXURE-A AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:52466 WP No. 31001 of 2025 CORAM: HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI ORAL ORDER The present writ petition is filed seeking the following order: “WHEREFORE, it is prayed that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to issue a writ in Interim Order appropriate or direction to: i. To quash the order dated 06.09.2025 made in Crl.Misc.No.1235/2025 on passed by the CJM Rural Court, at Bengaluru of the vide Annexure-A; ii. Direct the respondents not to take any precipitative action pursuant to the order dated 06.09.2025 made in Crl.Misc.No.1235/2025 on the file of the passed by the CJM Rural Court, at Bengaluru vide Annexure-A; and notice dated 29.09.2025 under Section 8(1) of the SARFAESI Act, vide Annexure-B; iii. To grant such any other relief/reliefs as deem fit to grant in the facts and circumstances.” 2. The facts of the case are that the petitioners in order to purchase the house have availed a loan of an amount of Rs.44,50,998/- from the respondent/bank on 24.08.2023 by depositing the title deeds of the schedule property as security and also executed registered memorandum of title deeds in favour of the respondent financial institutions. It is the case that the petitioners have paid an amount of Rs.9,64,185/- as - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:52466 WP No. 31001 of 2025 on 09.05.2025, the date of treating the account of the petitioners as NPA. The petitioners were due of an amount of Rs.1,00,000/- as on 28.08.2025 and the respondent/bank had declared the petitioners’ account as NPA just because they have failed to pay two installments i.e., Rs.1,00,000/-. It is stated that the petitioners have requested the bank authorities not to declare the account as NPA and denying the default, collecting excess interest is contrary to the terms of the loan agreement. It is also stated that they are ready and willing to close the account, but there was no cooperation from the respondent/bank. Later, the petitioners have paid the due of an amount of Rs.1,00,000/- on 22.08.2025. It is further stated that without considering the request of the petitioners, the bank had issued notice under Section 13(2) of the SARFAESI Act on 09.05.2025. It is stated that declaring the account of the petitioners’ as NPA is bad and the interest that is collected by the bank is also contrary to the terms of the loan agreement. It is stated that the respondent/bank has filed a petition under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act i.e., Crl.Misc.No.1235/2025 before the CJM, Rural Court, Bangalore. In the said petition, the bank officials led evidence - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:52466 WP No. 31001 of 2025 and got exparte order on 06.09.2025. Hence, the petitioners are before this Court questioning the order passed in Crl.Misc.No.1235/2025. 3. On 30.10.2025, this Court had passed an order which reads thus: “Learned Senior counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is ready to settle the amount and pay the due amount within three months and remaining amount will be paid within 2 weeks from today and in that regard he will file an undertaking affidavit before the court. By 03.11.2025, affidavit shall be served on the learned counsel for the respondent-Bank. List this mater on 04.11.2025.” Then on 04.11.2025 this Court had passed an order observing that: “An undertaking is filed before this Court stating that the petitioners are ready to pay an amount of Rs.2,00,000/- within 15 days and the outstanding amount of Rs.46,36,049/- within an outer limit of three months from today. Learned counsel for the respondent/bank submits that the possession is taken and to regularize the account the petitioners need to pay an amount of Rs.5,00,000/-. If they pay an amount of Rs.5,00,000/- and clear the remaining outstanding within three months, the bank has no objections. It is submitted that the bank will be communicating to the petitioners with regard to the outstanding amount as on today. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:52466 WP No. 31001 of 2025 In the light of the submissions made by the learned counsel for the respondent/bank, the petitioners shall pay an amount of Rs.5,00,000/- immediately and after the communication received from the bank they shall pay the remaining outstanding amount within three months and in that regard an affidavit shall be filed. List this matter on 11.11.2025. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent/bank shall communicate within two days.” 4. Today, when this matter came up before this Court, learned counsel appearing for the respondent/bank submits that auction was conducted on 17.11.2025. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that if the details pertaining to the auction are furnished, they will go before the Debt Recovery Tribunal. It is submitted that the time that is spent before this Court shall be excluded from the limitation as the limitation to approach the Debt Recovery Tribunal is only 45 days. 5. Having heard the learned counsels on either side, perused the material on record. The petitioners are aggrieved by the order that is passed under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act, they have approached this Court. Now the auction is conducted and the petitioners want to question the same - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:52466 WP No. 31001 of 2025 before the Debt Recovery Tribunal. Hence, this Court is passing the following: ORDER i. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of giving liberty to the petitioner to avail the remedy available before the Debt Recovery Tribunal subject to the law of limitation. However, the time that is spent before this Court shall be excluded. ii. The respondent/bank shall furnish the details pertaining to the auction within two days from today. iii. All I.As., in the writ petition shall stand closed. SD/- (LALITHA KANNEGANTI) JUDGE BN List No.: 1 Sl No.: 40