M/S Sriven Properties, v. The Authorised Officer

((((((((((((HC-KAR, NC:(2026:KHC:44579( WP(No.(26006(of(2026( ( ,,,,,,,,,, , CNR:(KAHC010578992026( ( ( IN(THE(HIGH(COURT(OF(KARNATAKA(AT(BENGALURU(

TH DATED(THIS(THE(19 (DAY(OF(AUGUST,(2026(

BEFORE(

THE(HON'BLE(MS.(JUSTICE(JYOTI(M(

WRIT(PETITION(NO.(26006(OF(2026((GM-DRT)(

BETWEEN:((

1., M/S,SRIVEN,PROPERTIES,, REGISTERED,PARTNERSHIP,FIRM, OFFICE,AT:,,SRIVEN,RAG,LANDMARK, TH 5 ,FLOOR,,NO.2,,WILSON,GARDEN,, HOSUR,ROAD,,BENGALURU-560,027., REPRESENTED,BY,ITS,PARTNERS:,,

SRI,T.J.,RAGHAVENDRA,MURTHY,, ,

2., SRI.,T.J.,RAGHAVENDRA,MURTHY,,

S/O,THIMMAIAH,, AGED,ABOUT,51,YEARS,, MANAGING,PARTNER,OF,

M/S,SRIVEN,PROPERTIES, SRIVEN,RAG,LANDMARK, TH5 ,FLOOR,,NO.2,,WILSON,,

GARDEN,,HOSUR,ROAD,,Digitallytisignedtiby PREMCHANDRA0M0R BENGALURU,-,560,027, Location:0HIGH COURT0OF , KARNATAKA …PETITIONERS, (BY,SMT.,SIRI,RAJASHEKAR,,ADVOCATE), AND:( THE,AUTHORISED,OFFICER, UNION,BANK,OF,INDIA,, HAVING,ITS,HEAD.,OFFICE,, AT,NO.239,,VIDHAN,BHAVAN,, MARG,,NARIMAN,POINT,, MUMBAI,-,400,021., AND,ALSO,AT:, HAVING,ITS,BRANCH,OFFICE,,

UNION BANK OF INDIA NO.2/3, RAJA BUILDING, N R ROAD, BENGALURU-560001.

…RESPONDENT (BY SMT. DIVYA PURANDAR, ADVOCATE) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, SEEKING CERTAIN RELIEFS.

THIS WRIT PETITION IS LISTED FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, AN ORDER IS MADE AS UNDER:

ORAL ORDER

Smt.Siri Rajashekar, counsel for the petitioners and Smt.Divya Purandar, counsel for the respondent appeared in person.

¶2This petition is filed seeking the following reliefs:

(i) Issue a writ of certiorari and / or mandamus or any other appropriate writ order or direction, that the continuation of proceedings in O.A.No.958/2022 before the Debts Recovery Tribunal-II, Bengaluru, Annexure-G & G1 is arbitrary, illegal and unsustainable, in view of the fact that the respondent - Bank had offered a One Time Settlement, the same was acted upon by the petitioner, and the entire amount payable under the OTS has been paid in full and received by the respondent - bank; and

(ii) Pass such other orders as this Hon'ble Court deems fit in the circumstances of the case in the interest of justice.

¶3Counsel for the petitioners submits that the continuation of the O.A. after the payment of the entire amount is arbitrary and unsustainable.

Next, she submits that the original claim in O.A. cannot be adjudicated in isolation from the subsequent OTS and Payments. The Bank being an instrumentality discharging public functions, is bound to act fairly and non arbitrarily. It has been vehemently contended that the question whether any further recoverable liability survives is currently before this Court in Writ Petitions Nos. 27716/2023 and connected cases, along with W.P.No.19651/2026. As a result, the DRT cannot continue with the case. She further argues that ongoing proceedings are legally untenable and requests that the writ petition may be allowed.

Conversely, the Bank's counsel argued that proceedings have been initiated before the Tribunal, where the petitioners are represented. The Tribunal has heard the case but has not

yet issued a final order. Therefore, she contended that the petitioners have no grounds for grievance at this point. Accordingly, she requested dismissal of the writ petition.

¶4The rival arguments are acknowledged.

¶5The Bank has filed proceedings before the Tribunal against the petitioners, and their counsel has already argued the case, though the Tribunal has not yet issued a decision. The existence of another pending writ petition should not serve as a basis to annul the ongoing proceedings. If the Tribunal's final decision is unfavourable to the petitioners, the petitioners retains the right to challenge it in the appropriate forum. Therefore, there is no need for intervention, issuance of orders, or exercise of discretionary powers under the writ jurisdiction.

¶6Accordingly, writ petition is dismissed. Sd/- (JYOTI M) JUDGE SS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 19