- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:6775 WP No. 1718 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO. 1718 OF 2026 (GM-RES) BETWEEN: 1. B G ANJANAPPA S/O. B.H. GUNADAREDDY, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS 2. KUMARI SRI PRIYA, D/O. B.G. ANJANAPPA, AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS 3. VINNETH, S/O. B.G. ANJANAPPA, AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS 4. HEMALATHA, W/O. B.G. ANJANAPPA, AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS 5. B.G. KRISHNA REDDY, S/O. B.H. GUNDAREDDY, AGED ABOUT 69 YEARS Digitally signed by VANAMALA N Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:6775 WP No. 1718 of 2026 6. SUSHEELAMMA, W/O. B.G. KRISHNA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 61 VEARS 7. B.K. NAGESH, S/O. B.G. KRISHNA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS 8. CHANDRAKALA, W/O. B.K. NAGESH, AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS 9. B.N. REESHAN REDDY, S/O. B.K. NAGESH, AGED ABOUT 12 YEARS SINCE MINOR REP. BY HIS NATURAL GUARDIAN B.K. NAGESH ALREADY ON RECORD AS PT 10. NAVEEN KUMAR, S/O. B.G. KRISHNA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS ALL PETITIONERS RESIDING AT BIDARAGUPPE VILLAGE, ATTIBELE HOBLI, ANEKAL TALUK, BENGALURU RUARAL DISTRICT, BENGALURU-562 107. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. K.G. RAGHAVAN., SENIOR ADVOCATE FOR SRI. J P DARSHAN.,ADVOCATE) - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:6775 WP No. 1718 of 2026 AND: 1. THE SECRETARY REAL ESTATE REGULATORY AUTHORITY KARNATAKA, HAVING OFFICE AT 2ND FLOOR, SILVER JUBILEE BLOCK, UNITY BUILDING, CSI COMPOUND, 3RD CROSS, MISSION ROAD, BENGALURU-560-027. 2. ARYAN GOLDEN ARENA BUYERS WELFARE ASSOCIATION, A WELFARE ASSOCIATION REGISTERED UNDER KARNATAKA SOCIETIES REGISTRATION ACT, 1960 HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT ARYAN GOLDEN ARENA, SARJAPURA-ATTIBELE ROAD, NEAR SYNDICATE BANK, SARJAPURA, BENGALURU-562-125, REP. BY ITS PRESIDENT TANMOY DEV. 3. M/S. ARYAN HOME TEC PVT LTD. A COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT, 1956, HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT 617, 15TH CROSS, 100 FT RING ROAD, J.P. NAGAR 6TH PHASE, BENGALURU-560-078 REP. BY ITS DIRECTOR. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:6775 WP No. 1718 of 2026 4. S.G. BHARATH @ BHARATH REDDY, DIRECTOR OF M/S. ARYAN HOME TEC PVT LTD., AGED MAJOR. R/AT NO. 87, 3 MAIN, DOLLARS COLONY, J.P. NAGAR 4TH PHASE, BENGALURU 560-078. 5. RASHMI SURENDRA REDDY, DIRECTOR OF M/S. ARYAN HOME TEC PVT LTD., AGED MAJOR, R/AT NO. 68, 36TH MAIN, 19TH CROSS, J.P. NAGAR 6TH PHASE, BENGALURU 560-078. 6. ARYAN GOLDEN ARENA THE REAL ESTATE PROJECT REGISTERED UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF RERA HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT ARYAN GOLDEN ARENA, SARJAPURA ATTIBELE RD, NEAR SYNDICATE BANK, BENGALURU 562125. 7. ANAND RATHI GLOBAL FINANCE LIMITED, A NON-BANKING FINANCE COMPANY, REGD. OFFICE AT 4TH FLOOR, SILVER METROPOLIS, JAI COACH COMPOUND, OPPOSITE BIMBISAR NAGAR GOREGAON (EAST), MUMBAI, MAHARASHTRA-400063. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:6775 WP No. 1718 of 2026 8. PIRAMAL CAPITAL FINANCE LTD, HOUSING FINANCE (DHFL) REP BY ITS MANAGER, OFFICE AT 13, 1 CROSS, M.B. JAYARAM ROAD, VASANTH NAGAR, KODAVASAMAJ BUILDING, BENGALURU ALSO, AT 560052, ALSO AT SY NO 208/1-B, 5TH FLOOR, BAJAJ FINSERV CORPORATE OFFICE, PUNE, AHMEDNAGAR ROAD, VIMANNAGAR, 411014. 9. SAMMAAN CAPITAL LIMITED FORMERLY KNOWN AS INDIABULLS HOUSING FINANCE LIMITED A COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER COMPANIES ACT 1956 REP BY ITS MANAGER, OFFICE AT 1ST FLOOR, BIKANER PINNACLE, RHENIUS STREET, RICHMOND ROAD, BENGALURU -560025. ALSO, AT PLOT 87, 6, RICHMOND ROAD, SHANTHALA NAGAR, RICHMOND TOWN, BENGALURU-560025. 10. AXIS BANK, REP BY ITS MANAGER, COX TOWN, 6, GROUND FLOOR, PRESTIGE LIONS GATE, - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:6775 WP No. 1718 of 2026 MOSQUE ROAD, BENGALURU -560005. 11. HOME FIRST FINANCE COMPANY LIMITED, REP BY ITS MANAGER, 35/29, 11TH MAIN, 5TH BLOCK, JAYANAGAR, OPP. TO MILAN HOSPITAL, JP NAGAR ROAD, BENGALURU-560041. ALSO, AT 511, ACME PLAZA, ANDHERI KURLA ROAD, ANDHERI EAST, MUMBAI-400059. 12. HDFC BANK, REP BY ITS MANAGER, SATHYA SADAN, 17/1, SARJAPUR- MARATHAHALLI ROAD, BELLANDUR, BENGALURU-560102. 13. YES BANK, REP BY ITS MANAGER, BANGALORE REGIONAL OFFICE MUNICIPAL, GROUND FLOOR, 3, KASTURBA ROAD, BENGALURU-560001 ALSO, AT REGD. OFFICE AT NEHRU CENTRE, 9TH FLOOR, DISCOVERY OF INDIA, DR. A.B. ROAD, WORLI, MUMBAI-400018. - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:6775 WP No. 1718 of 2026 14. SUNDARAM BNP PARIBAS HOME FINANCE LTD. REP BY ITS MANAGER, SECOND FLOOR, RAM PRABHA TOWERS, (OPP TO DHANAM STORES), 42/1 SHANTHI NAGAR, DENKANIKOTTA MAIN ROAD, HOSUR-635109. 15. RELIANCE HOME FINANCE, REP BY ITS MANAGER, NO. 39, FFK TOWERS, 2ND FLOOR, TILAK NAGAR, BANNERGHATTA ROAD BENGALURU-560041. 16. BAJAJ HOUSING FINANCE LTD., REP BY ITS MANAGER, PRESTIGE TOWER, 506/508, RESIDENCY ROAD, BENGALURU-560025. 17. PNE HOUSING FINANCE LTD., REP BY ITS MANAGER, A COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT 1956 REGD. OFFICE AT 9TH FLOOR, ANTHRIKSH BHAVAN, 22 KASTURBA GANDHI MARG, NEW DELHI 110001. 18. INDIA INFOLINE HOUSING FINANCE LTD., REP BY ITS MANAGER, - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:6775 WP No. 1718 of 2026 12A-10, 13TH FLOOR, PATINEE CRESCENZO, C-38 C39, G BLOCK, BEHIND MCA, BANDRA KURLA COMPLEX, BANDRA EAST, MUMBAL-400051 VENKATASWAMY NAIDU STREET, TASKAR TOWN, ALSO, AT SOMA MERIT, 9, GF, BENGALURU-560051. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.PRADEEP P K., ADVOCATE FOR C/R2; SRI. D.R. RAVISHANKAR., SENIOR ADVOCATE FOR SRI. SENTHIL KUMAR D.U., ADVOCATE FOR C/R3 TO R6) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA 1950 PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 12.12.2025 PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT NO. 1 AUTHORITY IN COMPLAINT BEARING NO. 01242/2024 AT ANNEXURE A. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:6775 WP No. 1718 of 2026 ORAL ORDER The petitioners are the owners of an immovable property which is offered for construction under a Joint Development Agreement and they are parties to the proceedings in Complaint No.01242/2024 with the Karnataka Real Estate Regulatory Authority, Bengaluru [the first respondent - for short, 'the Authority']. The complaint with the Authority is by a Welfare Association constituted by the allottees who claim interest in the units to be developed under the second respondent [the developer]. The Authority has disposed of this complaint by an order, which in its operative portion, reads as under: In exercise of the power conferred under section 31 of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act 2016, the complaint in No.01242/2024 is disposed of as under: 1. In view of the Memo dated 29/08/2025 filed by the Complainant Association, the prayer seeking for takeover of the project and other consequential reliefs are - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:6775 WP No. 1718 of 2026 dismissed, as the Complainant Association have permitted Respondent No.1 to proceed with the completion of the project. 2. Respondent Nos.1, 3, 4 & 5 have given an undertaking before the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka regarding settlement of dues with Respondent No.26 in WP No.2564/2023 and the DRT has passed an order setting aside the possession notice issued by Respondent No.26 for taking possession of the project land in SA No.53/2019, Respondent No.26 cannot claim equity over the above said project land. Furthermore, as the undertaking before the High Court is sacrosanct, Respondents No.1 to 14 shall amicably settle the disputes among themselves without interfering with the completion of the project. 3. In order to safeguard the interest of the allottees, who have been awaiting completion of the project since 2017, Respondents No.5 to 14 and Respondent No.26, including their - 11 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:6775 WP No. 1718 of 2026 agents, representatives or any person acting on their behalf, are hereby restrained from interfering with the commencement and progress of civil works in the project 'Aryan Golden Arena', so as to ensure timely completion. 4. The Respondent No.1 is hereby directed to commence the construction of the project "Aryan Golden Arena" within 30 days from the date of this order and obtain all necessary statutory approvals and file periodic compliance accordingly. 5. The Respondent No.1 shall disclose the progress of the project to the Complainant association. The Complainant Association and Respondent Nos.5 to 14 (Landowners) shall be entitled to seek information to ensure that the funds mobilized into the project and revenues generated are not diverted elsewhere, but utilized only towards completion of the project. 6. Respondent No.26 shall issue all necessary NOCs immediately to - 12 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:6775 WP No. 1718 of 2026 facilitate sale of units so that legitimate project revenues can flow enabling Respondent No.1 to complete the project. 7. Liberty is reserved to all stakeholders to approach this Authority or any other appropriate forum in the event of non-compliance with any of the directions issued herein or if their rights or interests are otherwise adversely affected. 2. Sri K.G.Raghavan, the learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners, without disputing that the petitioners have appellate remedy under Section 44 of the Real Estate [Regulation and Development] Act 2016 [for short, 'the Act'], submits that the petitioners invoke this Court's jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India because the Authority's direction restraining the petitioners interferes with the commencement and progress of the civil works in the project. The learned Senior Counsel submits that the Authority could not have - 13 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:6775 WP No. 1718 of 2026 assumed jurisdiction to restrain the petitioners by way of an order that tantamount to injunction. Sri.D.R.Ravishankar, the learned Senior Counsel who appears for Sri Senthil Kumar D.U., who is permitted to take notice for the third and sixth respondents, proposes to oppose the petition as does Sri Pradeep Kumar P.K., the learned counsel for the second respondent. 3. This Court must relegate the petitioners to avail appellate remedy under Section 44 of the Act if the grievance is on the merits of the Authority's order. However, this Court has heard the learned Senior Counsels and the learned counsels on whether the Authority's order injuncting the petitioners from interfering with the commencement and progress of civil works could foreclose the petitioners' right to initiate proceedings for vindication of their rights under the Joint Development Agreement with Sri.K.G.Raghavan arguing that the petitioners have a - 14 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:6775 WP No. 1718 of 2026 right under the Joint Development Agreement to insist that the developer must exit from the project. The unanimous submission is that there cannot be an injunction that would foreclose any civil remedy to a party. This gives a context for disposal of this petition as this Court does not opine that the petitioners must be relegated to the alternative remedy if the petition could be disposed of on just and equitable terms based on the aforesaid submissions. 4. At this stage, Sri K.G.Raghavan next submits that even this order could be construed as restraining the petitioners from even objecting to the developer from commencing the construction. This Court has considered this aspect in the light of the fact that the petitioners' primary grievance that the impugned direction limits its rights to avail its remedy. The petitioners to vindicate their grievance must necessarily initiate proceedings as is - 15 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:6775 WP No. 1718 of 2026 permissible to them in law without being bridled by the injunction as afore, and whether the impugned direction could operate as a restraint on the petitioners must also be examined in the proceedings that they initiate. In the light of the afore, the petition stands disposed of by the following terms: [a] The impugned direction cannot be a hindrance or an impediment to the petitioners to pursue their remedy for vindication of their rights under the Joint Development Agreement and in law. [b] The question whether the impugned direction could give a right to the petitioners to obstruct commencement of the construction is left open to be decided in the proceedings that the petitioners could initiate. - 16 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:6775 WP No. 1718 of 2026 [c] It is needless to observe that all questions, including who could be the parties to the proceedings that the petitioners may initiate, are left open. Sd/- (B M SHYAM PRASAD) JUDGE SA