- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:21346 WP No. 11899 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF APRIL, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI WRIT PETITION NO. 11899 OF 2026 (GM-DRT) BETWEEN: N.GURUDATTA S/O S. NARAYANA RAO AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS #6/1, DATTATREYA TEMPLE COMPLEX 2ND MAIN, DATTATREYA NAGAR HOSAKEREHALLI, BANASHANKARI III STAGE BANGALORE - 560 085 …PETITIONER (BY SRI. VINAYA KEERTHY M., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. BANK OF MAHARASHTRA ASSET RECOVERY BRANCH #465/A, 22ND CROSS, 3RD BLOCK OPP. NMKRV COLLEGE FOR WOMEN JAYANAGAR, BANGALORE - 560 011 REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORISED OFFICER 2. SRI. NANJUNDESHWARA BUILDERS AND DEVEOPERS (P) LTD #116/3, 3RD MAIN, KAVERINAGAR BANASHANKARI 3RD STAGE BANGALORE - 560 085 REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR L. SATHYA PRAKASH Digitally signed by SUVARNA T Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:21346 WP No. 11899 of 2026 3. VISHAL SRINIVASAN AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS S/O V. SHRIDHAR #8, I FLOOR, 6TH MAIN, VICTORIA LAYOUT BANGALORE -560 047 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.V.B.RAVISHANKAR, ADVOCATE FOR R1) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI QUASHING THE IMPUGNED AUCTION NOTICE DATED: 31.03.2026 (ITEM NO. 2) PUBLISHED IN THE NEW INDIAN EXPRESS ON 01.04.2026 (ANNEXURE-E) ISSUED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT WITH RESPECT TO THE FLAT NO. 2C, 2ND FLOOR, MEASURING 1133 SFT., YS APARTMENT, FORMED IN THE PROPERTY BEARING SY. NO. 6/2, GURUDATTA LAYOUT, HOSAKEREHALLI VILLAGE, UTTARAHALLI HOBLI, BANGALORE - 560 085. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI ORAL ORDER The present writ petition is filed seeking the following prayer. “Wherefore, the petitioner prays that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to: a. Issue a writ of certiorari quashing the impugned auction notice dated 31.03.2026 (Item No.2) published in the New Indian Express on 01.04.2026 (Annexure-E) issued by the first respondent with respect to the Flat No.2C, 2nd Floor, measuring 1133 sft., YS - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:21346 WP No. 11899 of 2026 Apartment, formed in the property bearing Sy.No.6/2, Gurudatta Layout, Hosakerehalli Village, Uttarahalli Hobli, Bangalore-560 085; b. Issue a writ of mandamus directing the first respondent to provide an opportunity to the petitioner to settle the outstanding amount mentioned in the impunged auction notice Dt.31.03.2026 (Annexure-E) under one time settlement scheme, in order to safeguard his residential property, which was unlawfully subjected to mortgage by the respondent Nos.2 and 3 in collusion with the first respondent’s officials; c. Pass such other relief/s as this Hon’ble Court deems fit & proper in the interest of justice & equity.” 2. It is a case of petitioner that his father had succeeded to an extent of 2 acres land in Sy.No.7 and 6/1 situated at Hosakerehalli village, Bangalore under a family partition entered into on 11.01.2001. Consequent to the death of his father, the petitioner and his siblings succeeded in the property. The petitioner constructed 24 residential apartments in the said property, out of which he disposed 23 apartments, retained two BHK apartment, measuring 1133 square feet. The petitioner had never executed any sale deed with respect to the property and has only let out the same. When the first respondent forcibly took possession of the apartment, the - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:21346 WP No. 11899 of 2026 petitioner came to know that the second respondent had fabricated GPA said to have been executed by the petitioner and his siblings, on the basis of which, he had executed registered sale deed dated 28.01.2010 in favour of the third respondent and using the said deed, third respondent availed loan from the first respondent. It is the case of the petitioner that the property belongs to him which has been fraudulently mortgaged by the second and third respondents. It is submitted that the second and third respondents were absconding. The petitioner is ready to pay the entire amount in One Time Settlement. Hence, there may be a direction to the Bank to accept the one time settlement. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the Bank submits that petitioner is neither a borrower nor a guarantor. In those circumstances, the Bank cannot accept One Time Settlement, even if the petitioner is ready to pay the money. 4. Having heard the learned counsels on either side, perused the material on record. It is an admitted fact that the petitioner is neither a borrower nor a guarantor. According to the petitioner, the property belongs to him, he has not sold the - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:21346 WP No. 11899 of 2026 property and fraudulently certain transactions have taken place and basing on that the third respondent has obtained the loan from the respondent-Bank. All these disputed questions of fact cannot be decided by this Court. If the petitioner is aggrieved by the sale deed that is executed, his remedy is elsewhere. Then coming to the aspect of paying the amount in One Time Settlement and direction the Bank is concerned, this Court cannot direct the Bank to accept the money from the petitioner who is neither a borrower nor a guarantor. In those circumstances, the petitioner is not entitled for any reliefs. Hence. this Court is passing the following: ORDER i. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of giving liberty to the petitioner to avail the appropriate remedy available in accordance with law. ii. All pending I.As., in the writ petition shall stand closed. SD/- (LALITHA KANNEGANTI) JUDGE PKN List No.: 1 Sl No.: 11