Karnataka High Court
Haliyur Boregowda Jayaram vs L And T Finance Limited on 30 January, 2026
-1-
NC: 2026:KHC:5916
WP No. 20311 of 2024
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 30TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI
WRIT PETITION NO. 20311 OF 2024 (GM-DRT)
BETWEEN:
HALIYUR BOREGOWDA JAYARAM,
SON OF BORE GOWDA,
AGE ABOUT 53 YEARS,
RESIDENT OF NO. 128
13th MAIN, 28th CROSS,
BANASHANKARI 2nd STAGE,
NEAR BNMIT COLLEGE
BANGALORE - 560 070.
...PETITIONER
Digitally signed
by SUVARNA T (BY SRI. AJAY KADKOL T, ADVOCATE)
Location:
HIGH COURT
OF
KARNATAKA AND:
L AND T FINANCE LIMITED
EARLIER KNOWN AS L AND T
HOUSING FINANCE LIMITED,
A COMPANY REGISTERED COMPANIES ACT,
1956
HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT
-2-
NC: 2026:KHC:5916
WP No. 20311 of 2024
HC-KAR
15th FLOOR, PS SRIJAM TECH PARK
PLOT NO.52, BLOCK DN
SECTOR V, SALT LAKE CITY
KOLKATA - 700 091
REPRESENTED BY ITS LEGAL MANAGER
ALSO AVAILABLE SITE NO. 2,
PLOT NO. 177, VIDYA NAGARI MARG
CST ROAD, KALINA
SANTACURZ EAST
MUMBAI - 40 098.
...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI. VASUDEVAN H.N, ADVOCATE)
THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227
OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT OR
ORDER QUASHING THE PROCEEDINGS IN CRL. MISC NO.
6557/2024 WHICH IS PENDING DISPOSAL BEFORE THE II
ADDL. CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, BANGALORE CITY,
WHICH IS PRODUCED AS ANNEXURE-A AND ETC.,
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS
DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI
-3-
NC: 2026:KHC:5916
WP No. 20311 of 2024
HC-KAR
ORAL ORDER
The present petition is filed seeking the following prayer:
a. Pass or issue an appropriate writ, direction or order quashing the proceedings in Crl.Misc.No.6557 of 2024 which is pending before the II Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bangalore City, which is produced as ANNEXURE -
"A".
AND b. Pass or issue an appropriate writ, direction or order quashing the Notice dated 17.04.2024, issued by the Respondent allegedly taking symbolic possession of the Property belonging to the Petitioner, which is produced at ANNEXURE -
"F".
AND/OR c. Pass such an order that this Hon'ble Court might deem fit, proper and necessary in the ends of justice.
2. The facts of the case are that the petitioner has obtained the loan from the respondent-Institution. He has repaid an amount to ₹ 1,98,20,518/-. It is the grievance of the petitioner that contrary to the terms set out in the Sanction letter and Loan agreement, the respondent-Institution began charging interest at fixed rate of 11.4% while willfully omitting their obligation of charging interest on the floating rates. In this regard, the petitioner has issued a legal notice dated 12.12.2023 to the respondents requesting them to rework the -4- NC: 2026:KHC:5916 WP No. 20311 of 2024 HC-KAR outstanding liability of the petitioner under the agreement. Despite the same, the respondent-Institution continued to conduct itself without even considering the legal notice. It is the case that the respondent-institution assured the petitioner, the request made by the petitioner would be considered. To the surprise of the petitioner, in the first week of January 2024, the petitioner received a notice under Section 13 of the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (for short 'SARFAESI Act'). The petitioner has approached the respondent-Institution seeking a one time settlement on 19.03.2024. The respondent-Institution had initiated the proceedings under Section 13(4) and Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act, at that time the petitioner has come up before this Court. A co-ordinate bench of this Court on 31.07.2024 has issued an interim order subject to the condition that the petitioner shall deposit ₹ 50,00,000/- within four weeks from the date of order, failing which, the respondent is at liberty to take physical possession of the subject property in accordance with law.
-5-
NC: 2026:KHC:5916 WP No. 20311 of 2024 HC-KAR
3. Learned counsel submits that infact, they have given a proposal to the respondent-Institution for a one time settlement of an amount of Rs.3,52,00,000/- but they are insisting on Rs.3,87,00,000/-. He submitted that he will go before the respondent-Institution and he will negotiate, if a reasonable time is granted.
4. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent- Institution submits that it was never a proposal from the respondent and they never accepted for Rs.3.87 crores. Their proposal for one time settlement is ₹ 5.28 crores. It is submitted that when an interim order was passed on 31.07.2024, the Court has granted four weeks time but the petitioner had not complied with the order within four weeks. In fact, an amount of Rs.10,00,000/- was paid on 03.09.2024. Another amount of Rs.40,00,000/- was paid on 14.10.2024. As the petitioner has not complied with the interim order, the respondent-Institution proceeded with Section 14 proceedings and an order was passed by the Magistrate on 08.10.2024. It is submitted that the petitioner has not issued any reply to the notice under Section 13(2) of SARFAESI Act. It is also -6- NC: 2026:KHC:5916 WP No. 20311 of 2024 HC-KAR submitted that the petitioner with regard to this floating interest should have availed the appropriate remedy available to him.
5. Learned counsel further submits that there are no grounds to interfere with the order that is passed under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act. The respondent has initiated the proceedings in compliance with the provisions of the SARFAESI Act.
6. Having heard the learned counsels on either side, perused the material placed on record. The grievance of the petitioner appears to be that instead of charging the floating interest, the Institution has charged a fixed interest of 11.4%. If that is the grievance of the petitioner, when he was aware of this, much before the account is declared as NPA, he should have availed the appropriate remedy stating that contrary to the terms and conditions of the loan agreement, the bank is charging the interest. But for the reasons best known to the petitioner, he has not taken any steps. However, the account was declared as NPA on 01.12.2023. It is the case of the petitioner that he has issued a notice on 12.12.2023. -7-
NC: 2026:KHC:5916 WP No. 20311 of 2024 HC-KAR Thereafter, the SARFAESI proceedings were initiated. After receiving 13(2) notice even at that stage, the petitioner has not approached the bank, has not given his reply with regard to this, which will compel the respondent-Institution to respond to the reply of the petitioner. In the light of the above facts and circumstances, this Court is of the view that this is not the case where the Court has to exercise the jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Hence, this Court is passing the following:-
ORDER i. The writ petition is disposed of giving liberty to the petitioner to avail the appropriate remedies, if any, available in accordance with law.
ii. The observations made in the order are only for the purpose of deciding this petition and the same shall not be construed as an expression of this Court.
iii. All I.As. in this petition shall stand closed.
SD/-
(LALITHA KANNEGANTI) JUDGE PSJ List No.: 1 Sl No.: 5