CAV ORDER

1. This writ petition has been filed seeking to quash/set aside the order dated 10.10.2022 passed by the II Additional Senior Civil Judge, at Bengaluru in O.S.No.1280/2020 and restore the suit in O.S.No.1280/2020 and also to dismiss I.A.No.II filed under Sections 5 and 8 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.

2. The petitioner herein is the plaintiff before the Trial Court and respondents Nos.1 & 2 are defendant Nos.1 & 2 respectively before the Trial Court.

3. The facts of the case are as follows:

The petitioner is an agriculturist and is the sole and absolute owner of the following properties in Survey No.21/1 measuring to an extent of 3 acres 08 guntas, situated at Chennasandra Village, Hessargatta Hobli, Bangalore North Taluk, as mentioned in Schedule ‘A’ property and Survey No.22/1-P1 measuring to an extent of 1 acre situated at Chennasandra Village, Hessargatta Hobli, Bangalore North Taluk, as mentioned in schedule ‘B’ property. The petitioner purchased schedule A & B properties vide sale deed dated 13.02.2004 and 04.04.2004. The petitioner being in need of funds to meet his legal necessities and as such the petitioner was introduced to the 2^nd respondent as kind and honourable person who would provide the required financial assistance to the petitioner. Thus, the petitioner approached the 2^nd respondent to advance Rs.1,00,00,000/- (Rupees One Crore Only). The 2^nd respondent agreed to advance the amount against schedule A & B properties and the petitioner agreed to deposit the title deeds of the aforesaid properties as security for the repayment of the loan. On 10.09.2015, a memorandum of deposit of title deeds was prepared in the name of the petitioner and the 1^st respondent, who is the wife of the 2^nd respondent. The petitioner executed the Memorandum of Deposit of Title Deeds acknowledging receipt of the sum of Rs.1,00,00,000/- (Rupees One Crore Only) repayable within 3 months along with interest at 1.5% per month as security, the petitioner accordingly deposited the original title deeds in respect of the petition Schedule ‘A’ and ‘B’ properties. Subsequently, the petitioner has made repayments upto an extent of Rs. 63,00,000/- (Rupees Sixty Three Lakhs Only) as on 10.09.2016. Since the amount was paid in cash, the petitioner has made the payments in the presence of witnesses. However, due to financial constraints, he was unable to repay the balance amount of 55,00,000/- (Rupees Fifty-Five Lakhs Only). In 2019, the 2^nd respondent started harassing the petitioner for repayment of the loan amount and the respondents had also approached C.C.B, Bengaluru, summoned the petitioner and threatened to arrest the petitioner if he failed to repay the amounts along with interest.

4. The petitioner has been allegedly coerced the petitioner to give an undertaking stating that the petitioner has obtained a loan of Rs.1,40,00,000/- (Rupees One Crore Forty Lakhs Only) and failed to repay and as such, the petitioner is offering to sell the schedule A & B properties for a total sale consideration of Rs.36,40,000/- (Rupees Thirty Six Lakh Forty Thousand Only) and it was also alleged that the 1^st respondent with the help of C.C.B compelled the petitioner to execute an agreement of sale deed dated 16.05.2019 in respect of the plaint schedule properties for a total sale consideration of Rs.36,40,000/- which was shown to be paid by cheque and no cheque was shown to be paid to the petitioner. Thereafter on 18.05.2019, the respondent got the agreement of sale dated 16.06.2019 registered in the office of the Sub-registrar, Malleshwaram and obtained a registered power of attorney in respect of the schedule A & B properties from the petitioner.

5. As the 2^nd respondent warned to sell the schedule A & B properties, if he fails to repay a sum of Rs.1,40,00,000/- by 30.11.2020, the petitioner was constrained to file the suit and filed the suit in O.S.No.1280/2022 against the respondents seeking declaration and injunction in respect of th