##PAGE1##

- 1 -

NC: 2025:KHC:54718-DB

WP No. 43252 of 2017

HC-KAR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 19^TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2025

PRESENT

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH

AND

THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE TARA VITASTA GANJU

WRIT PETITION NO. 43252 OF 2017 (GM-DRT)

BETWEEN:

1. SRI. AURANGAZEB @ KABEERUDDIN

AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS,

S/O. SRI. MOHAMMED SULAIMAN,

PROPRIETOR OF M/S. M. M. TIMBERS,

RESIDING AT MALLANDUR ROAD,

UPPALLI CIRCLE,

CHIKMAGALUR- 577 101.

2. SMT. ZAREENA AURANGAZEB

AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS,

W/O. SRI. AURANGAZEB,

RESIDING AT MALLANDUR ROAD,

UPPALLI CIRCLE,

CHIKMAGALURU- 577 101.

3. SRI. NAGENDRA RAO TERADAL

MAJOR IN AGE,

S/O. LATE RAJAPPA,

RESIDING AT PENSION MOHALLA,

CHIKMAGALUR TOWN,

CHIKMAGALUR- 577 101.

…PETITIONERS

(BY SMT. AMMAYAMMA, ADVOCATE - ABSENT)

- 2 -

NC: 2025:KHC:54718-DB

WP No. 43252 of 2017

HC-KAR

AND:

1. THE MANAGER

BANK OF BARODA,

CHIKMAGALUR BRANCH,

CHIKMAGALURU-577 101.

2. SRI. M. S. RAGHU

MAJOR IN AGE,

NO.61, AG LAYOUT,

NEW BEL ROAD,

BANGALORE-560 054,

REPRESENTED BY

SMT. PADMAJA RAGHU.

…RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. MOHAMMAD JAFFAR SHAH, AGA FOR R1

SRI. B.B. PATIL, ADVOCATE FOR R2 AND R3

SRI. PRADEEP NAYAK, ADVOCATE FOR R4)

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF

THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER

DTD.8.10.2012 PASSED BY THE DRT, BANGALORE IN

A.O.R.NO.3/2011 IN DCP NO.3916 IN O.A.NO.265/2004 VIDE

ANNEX-J AND ALSO THE ORDER PASSED BY THE RECOVERY

OFFICER ON 23.9.2011 IN DCP NO.3916 IN O.A.NO.265/2004

VIDE ANNEX-B AND ETC.

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR HEARING, THIS DAY,

ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH

and

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE TARA VITASTA GANJU

- 3 -

NC: 2025:KHC:54718-DB

WP No. 43252 of 2017

HC-KAR

ORAL ORDER

(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH)

The present writ petition has been filed impugning the

order dated 08.10.2012 passed by the DRT, Bengaluru in

A.O.R. No.3/2011 in DCP No.3916 in O.A.No.265/2004 and also

order passed by the Recovery Officer on 23.09.2011 in DCP

No.3916 in O.A.No.265/2004. The order dated 17.08.2017

passed by the Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal, Chennai in

R.A.No.23/2013 is also under challenge.

2. The petitioner/borrower had taken overdraft facility

of Rs.1,00,000/- and timber loan of Rs.4,00,000/- from the

respondent No.1-Bank in the year 1998. The Bank has claimed

outstanding amount of Rs.4 Crores against the said overdraft

facility and timber in the year 2018.

3. Petitioners' property was put to auction by the Bank

for recovery of its dues and auction purchaser had paid the

amount of Rs.26,50,000/-. The said auction proceedings were

the subject matter of challenge before the DRT. The petitioner

deposited Rs.15,00,000/- with the Bank while contesting

- 4 -

NC: 2025:KHC:54718-DB

WP No. 43252 of 2017

HC-KAR

auction proceedings before the order was passed by the DRAT

passed in O.A.No.265/2004.

4. The sale certificate was issued in favour of the

auction purchaser-respondent No.2 and it also has been

registered in favour of the auction purchaser. These

proceedings have remained pending since long period i.e., from

2012 before the DRT, DRAT and before this Court. The auction

purchaser though has paid entire amount of the auction sale,

has not been put to possession as of now.

5. The petitioners/borrower and the auction purchaser

have settled the dispute in respect of the scheduled property in

question, whereby, the petitioners have agreed to pay the

following amount to the auction purchaser. They have also

filed a joint memo before this Court in term of the settlement

arrived between them which reads as under:

"JOINT MEMO

"1. The present writ petition is filed seeking to quash order

dated 08.10.2012 passed by the DRT, Bengaluru in A.O.R. No.

3/2011 in DCP No.3916 in O.A. No. 265/2004 vide Annexure-J; the

order passed by the Recovery Officer on 23.09.2011 in DCP

No.3916 in Ο.Α. No. 265/2004; the order dated 17.08.2017 passed

by the Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal, Chennai in R.A. No.

23/2013 vide Annexure-L and consequently set aside the auction

sale in favour of respondent No.2 in respe