Sri. Arun Kumar. M Vs Bank of Baroda — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2026)

Sri. Arun Kumar. M Vs Bank of Baroda — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Respondent Bank directed to accept the three demand drafts of Rs.25 lakhs furnished by the petitioner; petitioner directed to approach the DRT-II for extension of time for the payment due, with liberty to file the extension application within two weeks (failing which no benefit); Bank directed not to precipitate the matter for two weeks. The interim order itself was not set aside or quashed.

Issue for consideration

Whether the interim order dated 05.12.2025 passed by the Debt Recovery Tribunal-II, Bengaluru (Case No.O.NO.3311/2025, Annexure-B), requiring deposit of Rs.1 crore with the respondent Bank, should be set aside or quashed as exorbitant. +1 more

Ratio / Principle

Since the petitioner, unable to pay Rs.1 crore before 30.12.2025, furnished three demand drafts of Rs.25 lakhs the same day to show bonafides, the respondent Bank is directed to accept them.

Key takeaways

In the meanwhile, the petitioner is directed to approach the Tribunal (Debt Recovery Tribunal-II) to seek extension of time for payment of the amount due.ratio¶45
Liberty is reserved to the petitioner to file an application for extension of time within two weeks from the date of this Order; failing which the petitioner will not be entitled to any benefit.ratio¶49
The respondent Bank is directed not to precipitate the matter for a period of two weeks from the date of this Order.ratio

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ Petition No. 246 of 2026 (GM-DRT), filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, challenged as exorbitant the interim order dated 05.12.2025 passed by the Debt Recovery Tribunal-II, Bengaluru in Case No.O.NO.3311/2025 (Annexure-B), whereby petitioner Arun Kumar. M had undertaken to deposit Rs.1 crore with Bank of Baroda (South End Road Branch) on or before 30.12.2025, and further prayed that the Bank be restrained from dispossessing the petitioners from the petition schedule property. Unable to pay by the stipulated date, the petitioner furnished three demand drafts stated at Rs.25 lakhs the same day to show bonafides. The High Court (Justice Ashok S. Kinagi), by oral order dated 08.01.2026, disposed of the petition without quashing the interim order: it directed the Bank to accept the drafts, directed the petitioner to approach the Tribunal for extension of time for the payment due, reserved liberty to apply for such extension within two weeks failing which no benefit would ensue, and ordered the Bank not to precipitate the matter for two weeks.

1 -

NC: 2026:KHC:1213 WP No. 246 of 2026

HC-KAR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 8^TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2026

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S.KINAGI

WRIT PETITION NO. 246 OF 2026 (GM-DRT)

BETWEEN:

SRI. ARUN KUMAR. M S/O LATE MALLIKARJUNEGOWDA MB, AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS, R/O NO. 86, 3^RD MAIN, 4^TH CROSS, DOLLARS LAYOUT, J.P. NAGAR, 4^TH PHASE, BENGALURU-560 078

Digitally signed by SUNITHA K S Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

SMT. KALAPANA S, W/O LATE MALLIKARJUNGOWDA AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, R/O NO. 86, 3^RD MAIN, 4TH CROSS, DOLLARS LAYOUT, J.P. NAGAR, 4TH PHASE, BENGALURU-560 078

…PETITIONERS

(BY SRI. VEVEK SUBBA REDDY, SR. COUNSEL FOR SRI. RUSHAB GOWDA, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. H V PRAVEEN GOWDA., ADVOCATE)

AND:

BANK OF BARODA SOUTH ENDD ROAD BRANCH NO.D16/1 GROUND FLOOR, BASAVANGUDI SOUTH END ROAD,

2 - NC: 2026:KHC:1213 WP No. 246 of 2026

HC-KAR

BENGALURU- 560 004 REP. BY ITS AUTHORIZED OFFICER

M/S POWER SYSTEM, COMPANY REGISTERED UNDER COMPANIES ACT REP. BY ITS PARTNER, NO.86, 3^RD MAIN, 4^TH CROSS, DOLLARTS LAYOUT JP NAGAR, 4^TH PHASE, BENGALURU, 560078

SRI.ANIL GOWDA, W/O HANUMANTHARAYAPPA, MAJOR BY AGE,

SMT.BYRAMMA W/O HANUMANTHARAYAPPA, MAJOR BY AGE,

MISS. KUSUMA, D/O HANUMANTHARAYAPPA. MAJOR BY AGE,

SRI.HANUMANTHARAYAPPA S/O NOT KNOWN, MAJOR BY AGE,

RESPONDENT Nos. 3 TO 6 ARE R/O NO.703, MARUTHI NILAYA, OPP. TO AMBEDKAR COLLEGE, KENGUNTE, MALLATHAHALLI, BENGALURU-560 056

MISS. ANUSHA M. D/O LATE MALLIKARJUNE GOWDA, MAJOR BY AGE, R/O NO.86, 3^RD MAIN, 4^TH CROSS, DOLLARS LAYOUT, JP NAGAR, 4^TH PHASE, BENGALURU-560 078

…RESPONDENTS

(BY MISS PREETHU R, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. VIGNESH SHETTY, ADVOCATE FOR C/R1)

3 -

NC: 2026:KHC:1213 WP No. 246 of 2026

HC-KAR

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO SET ASIDE OR QUASH THE INTERIM ORDER DTD. 05.12.2025 PASSED BY THE HON’BLE DEBT RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-II IN CASE No.O.NO.3311/2025 BENGALURU AS PER ANNX-B HOLDING THE SAME AS EXORBITANT. DIRECT THE R-1 BANK NOT TO DISPOSSESS THE PETITIONERS FROM THE PETITION SCHEDULE PROPERTY.

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

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S.KINAGI

ORAL ORDER

The petitioner filed this writ petition challenging the

order dated 05.12.2025 vide Annexure-B, wherein the petitioner has undertaken to deposit the amount of Rs.1 crore with the respondent Bank on or before 30.12.2025.

As the petitioner could not pay the amount of Rs.1 crore before 30.12.2025, the petitioner to show his bonafide has furnished 3 demand drafts of

Rs.25 lakhs today.

The respondent Bank is directed to accept the same.

4 -

NC: 2026:KHC:1213 WP No. 246 of 2026

HC-KAR

Meanwhile, the petitioner is directed to

approach the tribunal to seek extension of time for the

payment of amount in due.

Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of .

A liberty is reserved to the petitioner to file an

application for the extension of time within two weeks from today, failing which, the petitioner will not be entitled for any benefit.

The respondent Bank is directed not to

precipitate the matter for a period of two weeks from today.

Sd/(ASHOK S.KINAGI) JUDGE

SKS CT:KHV