- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:54552 WP No. 29053 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI WRIT PETITION NO. 29053 OF 2025 (GM-DRT) BETWEEN: CANARA BANK A BODY CORPORATE CONSTITUTED UDNER THE BANKING COMPANIES ACT, 1970 LHAVING ITS BRANCH OFFICE AT SPENCER TOWER M.G.ROAD BENGALURU -560 001 …PETITIONER (BY SRI. D.R.RAVISHANKAR, SENIOR COUNSEL FOR SRI.HEMANTH R. RAO, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. MR.ANIRUDH GUPTA S/O MR.MAHENDRA KUMAR GUPTA AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS RESIDING AT NO. 621, 16TH B MAIN 3RD CROSS Digitally signed by MEGHA MOHAN Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:54552 WP No. 29053 of 2025 3RD BLOCK KORAMANGALA BENGALURU -560 034 2. THE RECOERY OFFICER-1 DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL II NO.4 RESIDENCY ROAD BENGALURU -560 025 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.DHYAN CHINNAPPA, SENIOR COUNSEL FOR SRI.MOHAMMED SHAMEER, ADVOCATE FOR R1 SRI.P.NISHAN UNNI, ADVOCATE FOR R2) THIS PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED: 17.09.2025 PASSED BY THE RECOVERY OFFICER-1 DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL BENGALURU IN TRC NO. 491/2017 PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-A. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:54552 WP No. 29053 of 2025 CORAM: HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI ORAL ORDER The present writ petition is filed questioning the order dated 17.09.2025 passed by the Recovery Officer-1, Debts Recovery Tribunal, Bengaluru in TRC.No.491/2017. 2. The petitioner before this Court is the Canara Bank. The petitioner/Bank had filed O.A.No.346/2008 against Chamundi Industries Ltd. and others before the DRT Bengaluru and the same came to be allowed on 15.09.2015. Accordingly, a Recovery Certificate for a sum of Rs.43,44,89,664.43/- along with interest and other charges was issued by the DRT. The Bank had initiated execution proceedings before the Recovery Officer-1, DRT-II, Bengaluru. During the course of the said proceedings, it came to the knowledge of the Recovery Officer that one of the immovable properties which was mortgaged to the Bank was acquired by KIADB and defendant No.6 in O.A. fraudulently received the compensation of an amount of Rs.16,61,34,879/- on 28.10.2016 by filing a false affidavit that she had lost the sale deed of the said property. On receipt of the compensation amount, Mrs.Sarwan Kumari has diverted the - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:54552 WP No. 29053 of 2025 amount to her family members. On 28.10.2016, i.e., the same day that the compensation was received, Mrs.Sarwan Kumari has transferred a sum of Rs.50,00,058/- to respondent No.1 herein. In turn, respondent No.1 has invested the said amount in various mutual funds through his wife and son. 3. In the light of the above, respondent No.2/Recovery Officer has issued various orders of attachment attaching the bank account of respondent No.1. The respondent No.1 has filed a writ petition before this Court i.e., WP.No.44799/2017 and an order came to be passed on 19.06.2024 where the attachment order was quashed and liberty is reserved to the Recovery Officer, DRT for passing appropriate order if proved that the petitioner therein is holding money on behalf of the defendants. Against the said order, writ appeals were filed by the bank. In the meantime, the order impugned was passed by the Recovery Officer, whereby the Canara Bank was directed to comply with the order immediately. It was observed that notice has been issued to the MD and CEO for compliance of the order immediately and to file compliance thereon. Further, the Tribunal had directed the CGM (Recovery) to remain present before the Tribunal on 24.09.2025 and to file an affidavit as to - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:54552 WP No. 29053 of 2025 why action should not be taken for non-compliance of the order dated 13.08.2025. This order is questioned before this Court by way of present writ petition and a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court had passed an order on 23.09.2025. 4. By order dated 23.09.2025, the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court had observed that the primary question is whether the second respondent could have assumed jurisdiction to direct the presence of the officers as aforesaid and this question will have to be heard for a decision on merits and until then there must be stay. However, directed the petitioner to deposit the amounts payable in terms of the Court's order with the second respondent within a period of three weeks. Pursuant thereto, the petitioner herein has deposited the amount. 5. The respondent has filed contempt petition i.e., CCC.No.974/2025 which came to be disposed of on 22.09.2025. The Division Bench of this Court had observed that there is no ambiguity in the order of the learned Single Judge. The accused shall, therefore, initiate proceedings for recovery of the amount from Canara Bank. If the accused fails to do so, - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:54552 WP No. 29053 of 2025 the complainant has a remedy of approaching the Debts Recovery Tribunal for enforcing the orders already passed. 6. Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner/ Bank submits that as the writ appeals were pending, the matter may be posted after Winter Vacation 2025 and they will take steps to argue the writ appeal. It is submitted that it will be very difficult for the bank to recover the amounts. It is submitted that the matter may be adjourned after Winter Vacation 2025. 7. Learned Senior counsel appearing for the respondent submits that the order that is impugned before this Court is direction issued by the Recovery Officer directing the CGM (Recovery) to remain present before the Tribunal. Now, as the amount is deposited by the Bank, the CGM need not appear before the Recovery Officer and no further orders required to be passed in this writ petition. 8. Having heard the learned Senior counsels on either side, perused the entire material on record. As the Bank has already deposited the amount, the question of appearing before the Recovery Officer does not arise as he has already complied - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:54552 WP No. 29053 of 2025 with the order. The submission of the learned Senior counsel for the petitioner is that if the amounts will be transferred, it will be difficult for the Canara Bank to recover those amounts. Even if this writ petition is pending, those issues cannot be decided by this Court in this writ petition and the remedy is elsewhere. The petitioner can pursue the writ appeal pending before the Division Bench. In that view of the matter, nothing remains to be adjudicated in this writ petition. Hence, this Court is passing the following: ORDER i. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed as infructuous. ii. All I.As. in this petition shall stand closed. SD/- (LALITHA KANNEGANTI) JUDGE MEG List No.: 1 Sl No.: 44