IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 17^TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2025

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI

WRIT PETITION NO.12572 of 2024 (GM-DRT)

BETWEEN:

SHRI. JAISHANKAR SUNDARAM

S/O LATE T S SUNDARAM,

C 25, CENTURY CORBEL,

SAHAKARA NAGAR,

BANGALORE-560009.

REP. BY J H PRASANNA KUMAR,

GPA HOLDER,

PRESENTLY R/AT B006,

Digitally signed

by MEGHA AMITY HARMONY APARTMENT,

MOHAN

Location: HI GH

COURT OF SHASHIDHARA LAYOUT,

KARNATAKA

DWARAKANAGAR, CHANNASANDRA,

BENGALURU-560098.

…PETITIONER

(BY SRI. D.R. RAVISHANKAR, SR. COUNSEL FOR

SRI KESHAV R AGNIHOTRI, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1. THE BRANCH MANAGER UCO BANK, ASSET MANAGEMENT BRANCH, NO.13/22, K.G.ROAD, BANGALORE-560009.

2. M/S. SPARSH INFRA (PARTNERSHIP FIRM)

NO.2, 1^ST FLOOR, PATTABHI RAMAIAH STREET, R.B.ROAD, BENGALURU-560004 REP. BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, SRI MANISH KOTHARI (AUCTION PURCHASER)

…RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. PARASHURAM K. R., ADVOCATE FOR R1 SRI SAGAR G NAHAR, ADVOCATE FOR R2)

THIS PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND

227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT QUASHING ONLY PARA 35(IV) OF THE ORDER OF THE DATED 29.02.2024 IN S.A 263/2015 VIDE ANNEXURE-A; DIRECT TO THE R-1 UCO BANK TO RELEASE THE SCHEDULE PROPERTY WITH ORIGINAL TITLE DEEDS AS ENTIRE DUES OF THE BANK IS SATISFIED WAY BACK IN 2014 ITSELF AND ETC.

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, 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:

a) Issue a writ or order or direction of the nature of certiorari quashing only Para 35 (iv) of the order of the DRT dated 29.02.2024 in S.A.263/2015 vide Annexure- A.

b) Issue a writ or order or direction of the nature of a mandamus to the respondent No.1 UCO bank to release the schedule property with original title deeds as entire dues of the bank is satisfied way back in 2014 itself.

c) Issue a writ or order or directions of the nature of mandamus to refund the excess amount of Rs. 5,58,113.00 ((Re. Five lakhs fifty-eight thousand One hundred thirteen only) recovered with the interest @24% P.A. from 21.09.2011 and the forfeited amount of Rs. 10,52,500.00 lakhs (Rs Ten lakhs Fifty-Two Thousand Five Hundred only) with the interest @ 24% P.A. from 11.06.2015, till the date of realisation vide Annexure в dated 04.04.2024 &

C dated 15.04.2024.

d) Issue a writ or order or directions of the nature of mandamus to the respondent bank to pay interest @24% P.A. on the sale price of the schedule immovable property of Rs. 42.00 lakhs (Rs.Forty-Two Lakhs only) from 11.06.2015 till the date of realisation vide Annexure B dated 04.04.2024 e) To pass such other orders the Hon'ble Court deems fit in the interest of justice along with costs.

2. The petitioner is questioning the order passed in S.A.No.263/2015 dated 29.02.2024 whereby the tribunal declared that the measures taken by the Bank under Section 13(4) of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (for short ‘SARFAESI Act’) for sale of the scheduled property are invalid and set aside. The defendant-bank was directed to reverse all costs, charges and expenses incurred by it or any expenses incidental thereto in connection with the impugned actions taken against the applicant. Further, the bank has given liberty to invoke the provisions under the Act afresh for re-sale of the schedule property in accordance with the provisions of the Act and the Rules laid thereunder meticulously. The bank had carried this matter to DRAT by filing RA No.56/2024. Questioning the very same order, the borrower is before this court.

3. Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that he has cleared the entire amount in the year 2014 itself and in fact it is the case that the excess amount is recovered by the bank. It is submitted that when all these issues were agitated before the tribunal, the tribunal without giving any finding on that, has granted liberty to the bank to in