SATHYANARAYANA Vs. MANAGER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners claiming to be tenants under the

(2.) nd respondent-owner are before this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking for a writ of mandamus to direct the 1st respondent-The Bangalore City Co-operative Bank Ltd., (for short 'the Bank') to stop the process of vacating the petitioners 1 to 5 in terms of Notice (Annexure-H) dtd. 19/5/2022 issued by the 1st respondent under the provisions of the SARFAESI Act , 2002 (for short 'the 2002 Act'). 2. Heard Sri Harish M.G. learned counsel for the petitioners. Perused the writ petition papers.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that petitioners are tenants under the 2nd respondent- owner, who had obtained loan from the 1st respondent- Bank. For the default committed by the 2nd respondent, the 1st respondent-Bank initiated recovery action under the 2002 Act. It is the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioners that petitioners are in possession of the schedule property and no notice was issued to the petitioners, the petitioners have deposited huge amount with the 2nd respondent- owner.