IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 12^TH DAY OF MARCH, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI WRIT PETITION NO.36592 OF 2025 (GM-DRT)

BETWEEN:

1. UNION BANK OF INDIA A BODY CORPORATE CONSTITUTED UNDER THE BANKING COMPANIES (ACQUISITION AND TRANSFER OF UNDERTAKINGS) ACT HAVING ITS CENTRAL OFFICE AT NO.239 VIDHAN BHAWAN MARG, NARIMAN POINT MUMBAI-400 021, MAHARASHTRA INTER ALIA BRANCH AT NO.26 PB NO.2738, KH ROAD, SHANTHINAGAR, BENGALURU-560 027 REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF MANAGER SRI. DEVARAKONDA RAVIKRISHNA …PETITIONER (BY SRI. DHYAN CHINNAPPA, SENIOR ADVCOATE FOR Digitally signed by SUVARNA T SRI. VINAY KUMAR V.R., ADVOCATE [THROUGH V.C.])

Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AND:

1. THE RECOVERY OFFICER DEBT RECOVERY TRIBUNAL - II BSNL BUILDING, TELEPHONE HOUSE

4TH FLOOR, RAJ BHAVAN ROAD BENGALURU-560 001.

2. M/S. MAYA HOTELS PVT. LTD., REGISTERED UNDER PROVISIONS OF COMPANIES ACT 1956 NO.52/1, CHURCH STREET BENGALURU-560 001 COMPANY REP. BY MANAGING DIRECTOR.

3. SRI. M.C. KUMARSWAMY S/O SRI. M.P.CHANDRAIAH DIRECTOR M/S. MAYA HOTELS PVT. LTD., NO.52/1, CHURCH STREET BENGALURU-560 001.

4. SMT. THIRTA KUMARSWAMY W/O M.C.KUMARSWAMY DIRECTOR M/S. MAYA HOTELS PVT. LTD., NO.52/1, CHRUCH STREET BENGALURU-560 001.

…RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. S. VENKATESHWARAN, ADVOCATE FOR R2)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.1 VIDE HIS ORDER DATED 15.10.2025 ANNEX-A, CONSEQUENTLY, DIRECT THE RESPONDENT NO.1 TO DELIVER THE PHYSICAL POSSESSION OF THE PETITION SCHEDULE PROPERTY.

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:

“ WHEREFORE, the Petitioner prays that this Hon’ble Court be please to:

i) Quash/set aside the impugned order passed by the 1^st respondent vide his order dated 15.10.2025 (Annexure-A). In OA.No.62/08 before recovery officer DRT-II.

ii) Issue a writ in the nature of mandamus or appropriate writ, order or direction directing the 1^st respondents to hand over the physical possession of the schedule property to the petitioner as sought in the application filed by the petitioner before the 1^st respondent U/S. 22(h) of the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993, Read with Rule 39 of Income Tax (Certificate Proceedings) Rules 1962 vide (Annexure-V).

iii) Grant such other relief/s as this Hon’ble Court deems fit in the facts and circumstances of the case.

2. The petitioner before this Court is Union Bank of India. The facts of the case are the respondent No.2 to 4 had approached the Bank and availed credit facility by mortgaging the property. As loan account of the respondent has become NPA on 15.04.2006, an application came to be filed before the Debt Recovery Tribunal under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts due to Banks and Financial Institution Act, 1993 in OA No.62/2008, the said application was allowed on 16.06.2009. The recovery certificate came to be issued and in terms of the recovery certificate, the scheduled property came to be attached and the property was put for sale on 14 occasions and there was no prospective purchaser/s to purchase the scheduled property. The 1^st respondent on 20.04.2014 had issued a proclamation for sale and the auction was held on 30.05.2014. The petitioner after obtaining necessary permission from the Tribunal had participated in the auction sale and declared as a highest bidder and the sale held on 30.05.2014. In the interregnum, various proceedings were initiated by the Borrower. The Borrower had filed O.S.No.26636/2022 on the file of City Civil Judge at Bangalore against 1^st respondent and the petitioner seeking permanent injunction. It is submitted that initially the suit was filed by the Borrower against the third party and the Court has granted injunction. Thereafter, the Bank as well as the recovery officer were made parti