IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 19^TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO. 38243 OF 2025 (GM-RES)

BETWEEN:

SUNITHA H C D/O. CHANDRASHEKAR, AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS, FLAT NO. G-1007 MANTRI APLYNE, DR. VISHNUVRDHAN ROAD, NEAR PATALAMMA TEMPLE, BSK 5TH STAGE, SUBRAMANYA PURA BENGALURU 560061.

…PETITIONER (BY SRI. PRITHVIRAJ SHASTRY G., ADVOCATE FOR SRI. BALAKRISHNA SHASTRY G. ADVOCATE)

AND:

1. THE SPECIAL OFFICER

3^RD AND 4^TH FLOOR, PODIUM BLOCK, V.V. TOWER, DR. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BENGALURU 560 001.

2. SREE VASHISTA CREDIT SAUHARDA SAHAKARI LIMITED.

3^RD FLOOR, 8^TH CROSS, MARGOSA ROAD, REPRESENTED BY ITS ADMINISTRATOR C/O. JOINT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY, BENGALURU DIVISION, NO. 146, SAHAKARA SOUDHA, MALLESWARAM, BENGALURU 560 003.

…RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.VEERESH BUDHIHAL., ADVOCATE FOR R1;

NOTICE TO R2 STANDS DEFFERED)

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO (1) ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI OR ANY OTHER WRIT QUASHING THE ENDORSEMENT DATED 16- 01-2025 IN NO. SPLOCA/CLAIM/P-GRIV/35/2024- 25 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE A; (2) ISSUE A WRIT OF MANDAMUS OR ANY OTHER WRIT DIRECTING THE 1ST RESPONDENT TO MAKE PAYMENT OF THE PRINCIPAL AMOUNT AND THE INTEREST DUE ON THE CUMULATIVE DEPOSIT AND F.D. RECEIPTS DETAILED IN PARA 2 OF THE WRIT PETITION VIDE THE RECEIPT PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE B TO H (3) ISSUE A WRIT OF MANDAMUS OR ANY OTHER WRIT DIRECTING THE 1ST RESPONDENT TO MAKE PAYMENT OF RS. 1,47,914/- LYING IN THE S.B. ACCOUNT NO. 0010010011401 IN THE SREE VASHISTA CREDIT SOUHARDHA LIMITED PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE J.

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD ORAL ORDER The petitioner is a depositor whose request for adjudication of her claim under Section 7(2) of the Karnataka Protection of Interest of Depositors in Financial Establishments Act, 2004 [for short, 'the Act'] is rejected by the Endorsement dated 16.01.2025 [Annexure-A] informing her that the claim is not supported by verifiable proof as contemplated under Section 7(2) of the Act.

It is undisputed that the petitioner's brother is issued with a similar Endorsement, and he has successfully called in question such endorsement in W.P.No.37704/2025 [GM-RES] which is disposed of on 30.01.2026. This Court has quashed the Endorsement restoring the petitioner's application for reconsideration. This Court is persuaded in such petition because the petitioner therein, when issued with a communication to furnish NOC, had not only furnished the NOC but also documents to support investment with the second respondent. This petitioner also asserts that she has furnished similar documents, but they have not been considered.

On hearing Sri Veeresh R. Budihal, the learned counsel for the first respondent, for reasons of parity given the similarity in the circumstances, the petition stands disposed of quashing the impugned Endorsement dated 16.01.2025 [Annexure-A] restoring the petitioner's application for reconsideration. The petitioner is reserved with liberty to file a certified copy of this order and another representation with the first respondent, who shall within eight [8] weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order communicate the decision under Section 7(2) of the Act. It is needless to observe that all questions on the sufficiency of the proof are left open for due consideration.

Sd/-

(B M SHYAM PRASAD)

JUDGE SA ct:sr