- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:4358 WP No. 16939 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 27TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO. 16939 OF 2025 (GM-RES) BETWEEN: 1. MRS. SHILPA BASAVARAJ PROPRIETOR OF M/S VIBHUTI TECHNOLOGIES D/O LATE N. BASAVARAJ, AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS R/A NO.29, KH ROAD, SHANTHINAGAR, BANGALORE - 560 027 2. SUMANA H.B. W/O GIRISH GOWDA B S, AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS R/A 2ND CROSS, MAHALAKSHMI NAGAR, BATWADI, KUVEMPUNAGARA PO, TUMKURU 572 103 REPRESENTED BY GPA HOLDER, SRI. SEENAPPA S/O SRI. BANDAPPA, AGED ABOUT 69 YEARS R/A NO.108, APARTMENT, GLOBAL 3RD MAIN, MEADOWS 4TH CROSS, MYLASANDRA, BEML LAYOUT, 7TH STAGE, Digitally signed by VANAMALA N Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:4358 WP No. 16939 of 2025 BENGALURU - 560 059 …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. PHILIP ABRAHAM, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. K S PONNAPPA., ADVOCATE) AND: BANK OF BARODA (FORMERLY VIJAYA BANK) REPRESENTED BY ITS ASSISTANT GENERAL MANAGER, SHANTHINAGAR BRANCH, BANGALORE - 560 027 …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. VIGNESH SHETTY., ADVOCATE) THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENT TO RETURN THE ORIGINAL DOCUMENTS RELATED TO THE PETITIONERS PROPERTY i.e. THE ORIGINAL SALE DEED EXECUTED BY M/S LAKSHMI BUILDERS IN FAVOUR OF THE P-1 VIDE NO. BKI 10907/2017-18 DTD. 02.03.2018 AND THE ORIGINAL AGREEMENT FOR SALE DTD. 28.02.2018 EXECUTED BY M/S LAKSHMI BUILDERS IN FAVOUR OF THE P-1. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR EARLY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:4358 WP No. 16939 of 2025 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD ORAL ORDER The first petitioner, as the proprietor of M/s. Vibhuti Technologies, has availed loan from the respondent and the loan admittedly stands discharged. The first petitioner contends that the loan stands discharged because of an inter se agreement with the second petitioner, and insofar as the cause for the present petition, Mr. Philip Abraham, the learned counsel for the petitioners, submits that the respondent in issuing Certificate dated 26.03.2025, has acknowledged the closure of loans but has refused to hand over the title deeds deposited for the purposes of availing such loan. Mr. Philip Abraham also proposes to argue that the respondent has acknowledged that the deposit of title deeds are only for the subject loan. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:4358 WP No. 16939 of 2025 2. Mr. Vignesh Shetty, the learned counsel for the respondent, relying upon the Statement of Objections asserts [a] that the first petitioner is also the Proprietor of another concern called M/s. Vibuti Trading and she is a Director of M/s. BNH Infra Projects (India) Pvt. Ltd., [b] that these entities have also availed loans with the petitioner executing documents to offer personal guarantee for the loans extended, and [c] that the total outstanding is in excess of Rs.15 Crores. 3. Crucially, Mr. Vignesh Shetty submits that the respondent is entitled to lien as contemplated under Section 171 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872 because the first petitioner, in executing the different loan documents as part of a loan transaction by M/s. Vibuti Trading and M/s. BNH Infra Projects (India) Pvt. Ltd., has also agreed that the respondent can have lien over these documents for the loans extended to these facilities. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:4358 WP No. 16939 of 2025 4. These circumstances are considered, and this Court must opine that if the first petitioner has indeed executed any agreement offering the title documents of her property not only as security for the loan that she has availed as the proprietor of M/s. Vibuti Technologies but also as Proprietor/Director of other entities, the import of those contractual terms must be examined where factual assertions are assessed on trial. Therefore, with liberty to the petitioners to pursue remedy as is now permissible in law, the petition stands disposed of. SD/- (B M SHYAM PRASAD) JUDGE RB