Sri Athaulla vs The Deputy Commisisoner And District ...

Citation : 2026 Latest Caselaw 1972 Kant
Judgement Date : 6 March, 2026

[Cites 5, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

Sri Athaulla vs The Deputy Commisisoner And District ... on 6 March, 2026

                                       -1-
                                                     NC: 2026:KHC:13819
                                                 WP No. 2684 of 2022


            HC-KAR



                 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

                      DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF MARCH, 2026

                                     BEFORE
                        THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH
                     WRIT PETITION NO. 2684 OF 2022 (GM-RES)
            BETWEEN:

            1.    SRI ATHAULLA
                  S/O CHAMANSAB,
                  AGED 40 YEARS,
                  NO.46, MAHABBOBNAGAR MAIN ROAD,
                  DAVANAGERE 577001.

            2.    SMT SHIFANAZA, W/O ATHAULLA,
                  AGED 35 YEARS,
                  NO.46, MAHABOOBNAGAR MAIN ROAD,
                  DAVANAGERE 577001.
                                                          PETITIONERS

            (BY SMT. K.TEJASWINI, ADVOCATE FOR
               SRI. SIDDAPPA B M., ADVOCATE)
Digitally
signed by   AND:
VASANTHA
KUMARY B
K           1.    THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER AND DISTRICT
Location:         MAGISTRATE
HIGH
COURT OF          DAVANAGERE DISTRICT,
KARNATAKA         DAVANAGERE 577001.

            2.    DCB BANK LTD.
                  2ND FLOOR, NO.128,
                  PRESTIGE MERIDIAN ANNEXE,
                  M.G.ROAD,
                  BENGALORE 560001.
                  REPTD BY ITS AUTHORISED OFFICER,
                  MR.NARENDRA BABU NINGANEEDU.
                                                   ...RESPONDENTS
            (BY SRI. MOHAMMED JAFFAR SHAH, AGA FOR R1;
                                  -2-
                                                 NC: 2026:KHC:13819
                                                WP No. 2684 of 2022


HC-KAR



    SMT. YASHASVI, ADVOCATE FOR
   SRI. V.SURESH, ADVOCATE FOR R2)

     THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226
AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO
QUASH THE ORDER PASSED BY THE R-1 IN CASE DATED:
19.04.2021 PRODUCED AS ANNEXURE-F TO THE WRIT
PETITION, ETC.

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

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH

                           ORAL ORDER

The present writ petition has been filed impugning the order dated 19.04.2021 (Annexure-F) passed by the Deputy Commissioner whereby the mortgaged property has been attached under the provisions of Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (for short, 'the SARFAESI Act') for petitioners' failure to pay the outstanding loan as despite the notice under Section 13(2) of the Act for payment of the outstanding balance amount Rs.12,68,791/-, the petitioners failed to make the payment.

-3-

NC: 2026:KHC:13819 WP No. 2684 of 2022 HC-KAR

2. In pursuance to the order passed under Section 13(4) of the Act, the Deputy Commissioner has issued the impugned order. The petitioner has filed the present writ petition in the year 2022 and this Court, vide order dated 10.02.2022, granted the following interim relief.

" Interim order as prayed for, subject to petitioner paying to the second respondent-Bank, 30% of the amount due as under:
            i.        10% within two weeks.
            ii.       another 10% within next two weeks; and,
            iii.      the remainder i.e., 10% within two weeks
            next following,
            failing    which,   not    only   interim   order   stands
rescinded but writ petition itself runs the risk of being rejected."

3. The petitioners have complied with the interim order but they have not paid any amount thereafter and according to the bank, the total outstanding amount as of today is Rs.23,17,493/-.

4. The learned counsel for the respondent-Bank submits that the petitioners have no intention to regularize their Bank account and after obtaining the interim order dated 10.02.2022, the petitioners have not approached the Bank for -4- NC: 2026:KHC:13819 WP No. 2684 of 2022 HC-KAR one-time settlement (OTS) for making payment or to regularize their Bank account.

5. I have considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties.

6. This Court has entertained the writ petition and an interim order was granted way back on 10.02.2022, which has been complied with by the petitioners. It would be appropriate to grant an opportunity to the petitioners to approach the respondent-Bank for one-time settlement (OTS). If, however, one time settlement (OTS) is not arrived at between the parties, the petitioners should pay the outstanding balance amount in seven equal monthly instalments.

7. To test the bona fides of the petitioners, the petitioners are directed to make payment of Rs.5,00,000/- to the Bank within a period of 15 days i.e., on or before 20.03.2026 and approach the bank for one time settlement(OTS). The Bank is also expected to act reasonably and offer reasonable one time settlement(OTS). The petitioners must act on the one time -5- NC: 2026:KHC:13819 WP No. 2684 of 2022 HC-KAR settlement(OTS), if they find it to be reasonable. However, in case the parties fail to arrive at one time settlement, the petitioners should pay the balance outstanding amount in 8 equal instalments as follows:

The first instalment is to be paid on or before 15.04.2026 and the remaining 7 instalments on or before 15th day of each succeeding month, thereafter.

8. In case of failure to make payment of Rs.5,00,000/- as directed above, or failure to make payment of any of the instalments as stated above, the Bank shall be free to proceed against the petitioners to recover its outstanding dues in accordance with the law.

9. With the aforesaid directions to the parties, the writ petition stands disposed of.

Sd/-

(D K SINGH) JUDGE RKA List No.: 1 Sl No.: 6