IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT

BENGALURU
WRIT PETITION No. ______/2024 (GM - RES)
Serial No. BETWEEN:
MNG Law Office HARSHIT MOHAN
Advocates
No. #318, First Floor, AND:
15th Cross, 6th Main Road,
Sadashivanagar, Bengaluru M/S LANDSTAR HOMES
-560080 & 0RS

E: mnglawoffice@gmail.com
PH: +91-9999340256
: +91-9958617492

NO. DESCRIPTION OF PAPER PRESENTED COURT FEE

AFFIXED ON
THE
PAPER

1) ON THE MEMORANDUM OF WRIT PETITION

2) ON CERTIFIED COPIES
3) ON PROCESS FEE
4) ON COPY APPLICATION
5) ON VAKALATH

TOT
C.F. .
PRESENTED BY:
PETITIONER

RECEIVED PAPER
ADVOCATE CLERK WITH COURT FEE
BENGALURU COURT FEE AS ABOVE
DATE: __/06/2024 RECEIVING CLERK

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT

BENGALURU
WRIT PETITION No. ______/2024 (GM - RES)
BETWEEN:
HARSHIT MOHAN …PETITIONER
AND:
M/S LANDSTAR HOMES & ORS. …RESPONDENTS

INDEX

Sl. Particulars Pages

No.

1) SYPNOSIS

2) MEMORANDUM OF WRIT PETITION

3) VERIFYING AFFIDAVIT

4) ANNEXURE-A Special Power of

Attorney on behalf of the Petitioner

5) ANNEXURE-B Copy of Agreement

for sale dated 17.02.2020

6) ANNEXURE-C Copy of Payment

Receipts
 7) ANNEXURE-D Copy of Tri-partite
agreement dated 31.08.2021

8) ANNEXURE-E Copy of Loan

sanction/Arrangement letter

9) ANNEXURE-F Copy of Loan

Account Statement

10) ANNEXURE – G Copy of legal

notice dated 24.05.2023

11) ANNEXURE – G-1 Speed post

receipt

12) ANNEXURE H – Copy of policy

circular 58/2013-14 dated 18th
November, 2013

13) ANNEXURE H-1 Copy of Policy

circular 75/ 2016-17 dated July 01,
2016

14) VAKALATH

BENGALURU,
DATED: __/06/2024 ADVOCATE FOR PETITONER
 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT
BENGALURU
WRIT PETITION No. ______/2024 (GM - RES)
BETWEEN:
HARSHIT MOHAN …PETITIONER
AND:
M/S LANDSTAR HOMES & ORS. …RESPONDENTS
SYNOPSIS

17.02.2020 Agreement of sale was

entered into between the
Petitioner and Respondent
No.7.

09.08.2021 The Petitioner was allotted the

Unit no. 007, Ground Floor,
Pinnacle, situated at
Hirandahalli Village, Bidarahalli
Hobli, Bangalore East Taluk,
Bangalore, Karnataka in the
 project of Respondent no. 7.

25.02.2020 Petitioner paid an amount to

26.02.2022 a tune of Rs. 8,00,000/- (Rs.
Eight Lakhs Only) and Rs.
5,00,000/- (five lakhs only)
as earnest money towards
unit in question to the
Respondent 7.

26.02.2020 A Tripartite Agreement was

entered between the
Petitioner and the
Respondent No. 6-7 whereby
IDBI Bank Ltd. (OP No. 6)
sanctioned an amount of Rs.
50,00,000/- (Rs. Fifty Lakhs
Only) and disbursed an
amount of Rs. 42,11,600/-
(Rs. Forty-Two lakhs Eleven
Thousand and Six Hundred
only) to Respondent No. 7 in
one shot which is violative of
guidelines issued by
Respondent No. 3 and
 Respondent No. 4.

24.05.2023 Legal notice for cancellation

of booking of the unit in
question sent by the
Petitioner to Respondent No.
7 for the reasons mentioned
in the legal notice and also in
the present Petition, however
of no avail.

That the Petitioner herein, being aggrieved by the

acts of Respondent No. 6 and Respondent No. 7 is
constrained to knock upon the doors of this Hon’ble
Court on the following amongst other grounds:

GROUNDS

1. It is submitted that Petitioner was allotted Unit

No. no. 007, Ground Floor, Pinnacle, situated at
Hirandahalli Village, Bidarahalli Hobli, Bangalore
East Taluk, Bangalore, Karnataka. That in order
to purchase the above-stated apartment the
petitioner paid Rs. 8,00,000/- (Rs. Eight Lakhs
Only) and Rs. 5,00,000/- (five lakhs only) to the
Respondent No.7 from his own corpus in the
years 2020 & 2022 towards part payment of sale
consideration. The Respondent No.7 floated the
scheme of No EMI till possession/ Subvention
scheme, whereby the Respondent no. 7
undertook to pay EMIs to the Respondent no. 6
bank on behalf of the Petitioner till the
Respondent no. 7 delivers actual physical
possession of the flat in question to the
Petitioner. It was also assured by the Respondent
No. 7 to the petitioner that the petitioner at his
will can withdraw from the project at any time
before handing over the possession. It was
further assured by the Respondent no. 7 to the
Petitioner that in case the Petitioner withdraws
from the project, or Respondent no. 7 fails to
deliver the possession of the flat in time as
agreed in the Agreement for sale, or for any
other reason agreement is not fulfilled then the
Respondent no. 7 would be responsible/liable to
close the loan account of the petitioner with
Respondent No.6 in totality. The assured date of
possession was May 2021 but to date the
possession has not been even offered. On the
 other hand, the Respondent No.6 and 7 hand in
glove with each other, are trying to defraud the
Petitioner herein by demanding the EMIs from
the Petitioner despite the fact that the liability to
pay the same is of Respondent No.7. It is
pertinent to mention here that the Respondent
no. 6 was duty bound under the circulars/policy
framed by Respondent No. 3 & 4 to disburse the
loan amount in line with stages of construction of
the project as well as flat in question but on the
contrary, Respondent No. 6 disbursed the entire
loan amount in one shot since there was
collusion between Respondent no. 6 and 7.

2. It is further submitted that as per the Tripartite

Agreement entered into between Petitioner and
the Respondent No.6 to 7, it is crystal clear that
in the event the project is shelved by the
Builder/Respondent No.7 or the booking is
cancelled by the Builder/Respondent No.7 or for
any reason what so ever the Respondent
No.6/Bank is entitled to recover all the money
from the Respondent No.7/Builder which includes
the money due to the Petitioner being paid by
 the Petitioner himself and also the loan amount
disbursed by the Respondent No.6 directly to the
Respondent Nos. 7. Since the petitioner has
withdrawn from the purchase of the said unit the
Respondent No.6 is entitled to recover all dues
from the Respondent No.7 in terms of Tripartite
Agreement. That in terms of the Tripartite
agreement, the Respondent No. 6 was
contractually bound to demand the disbursed
loan amount paid to the Respondent Nos. 7 on
account of the cancellation of the purchase,
however, the Respondent No. 6's inaction in
recovering the money from the Respondent Nos.
7 clearly shows the collusion between the
Respondent no. 6 and 7 in defrauding the
innocent Petitioner.

3. That as of now Respondent No. 6 is demanding

the EMI’s and loan amounts from the Petitioner
despite being aware that it is the Respondent No.
7 who is actually liable to pay the EMI’s and Loan
Amount to the Respondent No. 6. This clear
collusion between the Respondent No. 6 and
Respondent No. 7 has led the petitioner to
 approach the Hon’ble Court for its kind
intervention as the Respondent No. 6 and 7 in
collusion are infringing upon the rights of the
Petitioner.

4. It is submitted that, the Respondent No.6 in

terms of Tripartite Agreement, executed between
the Petitioner and Respondent No.6 and 7, ought
to have collected the EMI’s and Loan amount
from the Respondent No. 6 first and upon its
failure then from Petitioner, however due to
collusion between the Respondent Nos. 6 and 7,
the Respondent No. 7 is targeting the Petitioner
as the petitioner is an easy target.

5. It is submitted that the guidelines issued by

Respondent No.4 provides that a loan amount
shall not be disbursed to a developer/builder on
behalf of a homebuyer in its entirety at the
beginning, but rather the disbursal should be
processed as per construction stage of the
project, yet the Respondent No. 6 disbursed the
entire loan amount to the Respondent No. 7 in
 one shot without confirming the actual status of
construction of project of Respondent No. 7.

6. It is submitted that the Respondent No. 6 is

bound by the directives/circulars of the
Respondent No 3, Reserve Bank of India and the
Respondent No. 4, National Housing Bank. That
the Respondent No. 6 is duty bound to strictly
adhere to the said guidelines without fail. That it
is also worthy to note that the Respondent No.6
by advancing loan & dealing with public at large
is discharging duties in public domain and as
such is amenable to writ jurisdiction.

7. It is submitted that, when the Petitioner

discovered that the project of Respondent No. 7
is far from completion of construction, and no
possession will be offered to the Petitioner in
near future, the Petitioner herein opted out of
the said scheme vide legal notice issued by the
Petitioner to the Respondent No. 6 & 7. The
Respondent No.6 was intimated that by virtue of
cancellation/ opting out of the Petitioner from the
scheme, the entire liability of the EMI’s and loan
 amount is solely on the Respondent Nos.7.
However, the Respondent No.6, continues to
harass the Petitioner by demanding EMI’s and
loan amount towards the flat despite being
aware that it is the Respondent No. 7 who is
actually liable to pay the abovesaid amount, and
this act of biasness of the Respondent No.6 in
favor of Respondent No.7 and against the
Petitioner has led to demand of intervention of
the Hon’ble Court in order to further prevent the
Respondent No.6 and 7 to harass the Petitioner
and other innocent homebuyers.

8. It is submitted that the present actions of the

Respondent No.6 and 7 affects larger public
interest because banks and builders collude with
each other in order to burden the homebuyers
for repayment, whereas to its contrary, the
Developer/builder continues to remain evasive of
possession of flat to the Petitioner as well as the
EMI’s and loan amount to the financial
institution.
9. The Petitioners crave the leave of this Hon'ble
Court to raise additional grounds and defense in
support of their case at the time of arguments.

BENGALURU
DATE: __/06/2024 ADVOCATE FOR PETITIONER
 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT
BENGALURU
WRIT PETITION No. ______/2024 (GM - RES)
BETWEEN:
HARSHIT MOHAN
S/o Brij Mohan Shrivastava
A008, CMRS Royal Orchid Apartment,
Balagere Road,Varthur, Bangalore,
Karnataka- 560087 …PETITIONER
AND:
1. THE UNION OF INDIA
Represented by its Chief Secretary,
Ministry of Finance, North Block,
New Delhi-110001.

2. THE MINISTRY OF FINANCE,

Government of India,
Represented by its Chief secretary,
North Block, New Delhi - 110001

3. RESERVE BANK OF INDIA

Established under the Reserve Bank of India Act,
having one of Its office at Nrupathunga Road,
Bengaluru - 560001
Represented by its Manager
4. NATIONAL HOUSING BARIK
Core S-A, India Habitat Centre.
Lodri Road, New Delhi-110003
Represented by its Manager

5. TransUnion CIBIL. Limited,

Company incorporated under the provision
Of Companies Act, 1956
(Formerly: Credit Information Bureau (India)
Limited)
One Indiabulls Centre, Tower 2A, 19th Floor,
Senapat Bapat Marg, Elphinstone Road,
Mumbai-400 013.
Represented by its Managing Director

6. IDBI BANK LTD.,

Branch Office At:
6th Main, 80ft Road,
Indiranagar,
Bangalore- 560103

Registered office at:

IDBI Tower, WTC Complex,
 Cuffe Parade, Colaba,
Mumbai- 400005
Represented by its Managing Director

7. M/S. LANDSTAR HOMES,

Having its office at H- 108,
Sriram Spurti, AECS,
Brookefields,
Bengaluru- 560037
Represented by its Managing Director.
…RESPONDENTS
 MEMORANDUM OF WRIT PETITION
UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE
CONSTITUTION OF INDIA

1. That the address of the Petitioner for the

service of all court notices, summons etc.,
is as given above in the cause title and also
that of their Advocates MNG Law Office,
No. #318, First Floor, 15th Cross, 6th Main
Road, Sadashivanagar, Bengaluru - 56008,
through (1) Mr. Nitin Goel, Advocate, (2)
Мr. Mayank Goel, Advocate.

2. That the addresses of the Respondents for

the same purpose are as given above in the
Cause Title.

3. The Petitioner being aggrieved by the

collusive actions of the Respondent No. 6
and 7 upon which the Respondent No. 1 to
5 have turned a blind eye, having no other
alternative remedy, has approached this
Hon'ble Court with the present Petition.
 BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE:

4. That the Petitioner is a peaceful and law

abiding citizen of India and in the present
petition is being represented by his Special
Power of Attorney holder namely Smt.
Krishna Devi Sharma.
Copy of Special Power of Attorney is
annexed herewith as Annexure -A.

5. That in the year 2020, the Petitioner

was looking for a flat in Bangalore or its
nearby areas for his personal and family
usage and for the same posted their
requirement on internet. That the
Respondent No. 7 in the year 2020 was in
the process of construction of their group
housing project namely “PINACCLE”
situated at Hirandahalli Village, Bidarahalli
Hobli, Bangalore East Taluk-560049.
6. It is submitted that the officials/booking
agents/employees of the Respondent No. 7
got the Petitioner’s details from the internet
and thereafter appraised the Petitioner
about the aforesaid project. That officials of
Respondent no. 7/builder showed the
Petitioner a sample flat and brochures and
further told the Petitioner that possession
would be given shortly as the project is
nearly at the completion stage. That before
booking the flat in question, the
officials/booking agents/employees of the
Respondent no. 7/builder told the Petitioner
that the IDBI Bank, Respondent No. 6 on
their pretext is providing loan facilities at
low-interest rates for the customers/
buyers to purchase the flat in the project of
the Respondent No. 7. The official of the
developer further assured the Petitioner
that if they purchase a flat with them and
take a loan from the said financing
institution for financing the loan for flat in
question, then, in that case, the developer
(respondent no. 7) will make timely and
regular payments of all the EMI’s of the flat
to the Respondent No. 6 on behalf of
Petitioner till the possession is delivered to
the Petitioner.
7. It is submitted that at that time it was also
assured by the Respondent No. 7 to the
Petitioner that if for the aforesaid flat the
Petitioner gets the loan sanctioned from
Respondent No. 6, then, in that case, they
have made such an arrangement with the
Respondent No. 6 that in the event of non-
completion of the project in time or/and
non-allotment of flat in question, the
Respondent no. 7 will be solely responsible
for the default of loan amount and they will
also be liable for closing the loan amount
along with interest either by arranging the
said amount themselves or by selling the
flat. That it is further submitted that it was
agreed between the Petitioner and
Respondent no. 7 herein that the
possession will be delivered shortly to the
Petitioner as the construction of the said
project of the Respondent No. 7 is going on
in full swing and is nearly at completion
stage.
8. It is submitted that it was also assured that
if for any reason, the petitioner wishes, the
Petitioner can opt-out for cancellation of the
flat and the entire sum shall be refunded to
the Petitioner and the bank loan, if availed
any, will be cleared directly with
Respondent No. 6 with interest by
Respondent no. 7.

9. It is submitted that based on aforesaid

representation, the Petitioner desired to
purchase a Residential Apartment and
accordingly was allotted Unit no. 007,
Ground Floor, Bangalore, Karnataka in the
project of Respondent No.7 namely
“PINACCLE” situated at Hirandahalli Village,
Bidarahalli Hobli, Bangalore East Taluk-
560049. for a total consideration of Rs.
64,71,136/- (Rs. Sixty four lakhs seventy
one thousand one hundred and thirty six
rupees Only). It is further submitted that
the Petitioner paid an amount to a tune of
Rs. 10,00,000/- (Rs. Ten Lakhs Only) on
two occasions to the Respondent No. 7
 towards the booking of unit in question
which was duly received and acknowledged
by the Respondent No. 7. It is further
submitted that thereafter the Petitioner and
Respondent No. 7 entered into an
Agreement for Sale dated 17.02.2020.
Copy of Agreement for Sale dated
17.02.2020 is annexed herewith as
ANNEXURE-B.
Copy of payment receipts is annexed
herewith as ANNEXURE-C.

10. It is submitted that for the remaining

amount the officials of the Respondent No.
7 introduced the Petitioner to officials of the
IDBI Bank Ltd. (Respondent No. 6), having
its branch office at 6th Main, 80ft Road,
Indiranagar, Bangalore- 560103 for loan on
the remaining amount. That the
Respondent No.6 sanctioned an amount of
Rs. 50,00,000/- (Rs. Fifty Lakhs Only) and
disbursed an amount of Rs.42,11,600/-
(Rs. Forty-Two Lakhs Eleven Thousand and
Six Hundred only) directly to Respondent
 No.7 without confirming the status of
construction of unit in question

A Copy of the Tri-Partite Agreement dated

31.08.2021 is annexed herewith as
ANNEXURE D.

A copy of the loan sanction/arrangement

letter is annexed herewith as ANNEXURE E.

11. It is submitted that it was agreed between

the Petitioner and Respondent No. 7 that
the Respondent No. 7 will pay PRE-EMI
under the Subvention payment plan till the
possession is delivered from the date of
disbursement of the loan, but the same has
not taken place. Even though initially some
EMIs were paid by the Respondent No. 7
but thereafter the Respondent No. 7
stopped making the same.
A copy of loan account statement of the
complainant is annexed herewith as
ANNEXURE F.
12. It is submitted that the Petitioner on
various occasions visited the corporate
office and site office of the Respondent No.
7 to enquire about the status of possession
of unit in question, however the requests of
the Petitioner felt on deaf ears of the
Respondent No. 7 and the Petitioner was
stalled each time. It is further submitted
that the Respondent No. 6 had transferred
the entire loan amount directly to the
Respondent No. 7 without confirming the
actual status of construction of unit in
question. It is pertinent to mention here
that the Respondent No. 6 was supposed to
disburse the loan amount to the
Respondent No. 7 in phase wise manner
linked with the stage of the construction of
the project.

13. It is submitted that despite the promise to

pay the Pre-EMI, Respondent No. 7 has
stopped paying the EMIs to the Respondent
No. 6 causing severe hardships to the
Petitioner. It is further submitted that the
 Respondent no. 7 promised to deliver the
possession of the flat in question by May,
2021 which has been violated as no
possession was offered within the promise
time frame.

14. It is submitted that the Petitioner through

its counsel sent a notice dated 23.05.2023
to Respondent No. 6 and 7, intimating the
Respondent No. 6 & 7 that the petitioner
has withdrawn from the project, however
the said notice was ignored by the
Respondent No. 6-7.
The copy of Legal Notice dated 23.05.2023
along with speed post receipt is annexed
herewith as ANNEXURE G, ANNEXURE G-
1 respectively.

15. It is submitted that, though the Petitioner

has withdrawn from the said scheme by
canceling the booking of the Apartment
Unit, the Respondent No.6 financial
institution, without demanding the
remaining loan due from the Respondent
 No.7, is demanding the EMIs & balance loan
from the Petitioner. It is submitted that in
apprehension of the adverse effect of the
CIBIL Score of the Petitioner in the event of
non-payment of loan due as and when
demanded by the Respondent No.6, the
Petitioner is making the payment of EMI to
the Respondent No.6 till date.

16. It is pertinent to mention that since the

Respondent no/ 7 has failed to complete
the project as promised under the
agreement of sale, the Petitioner herein has
terminated/cancelled his booking by issuing
cancellation notice. That since the
petitioner has cancelled the booking,
therefore in terms of Tri Partite agreement
the Respondent No.6/Bank is entitled to
receive all monies from the Respondent
No.7/Builder, however till date the
petitioner is being harassed by the
Respondent No.6/Bank in all possible
manner for recovery of loan dues without
 putting any efforts for recovering the loan
dues from the Respondent No.7.

17. It is submitted that Respondent No. 3 in

order to have authority over banks
regarding upfront payment to builders
without considering the stages of
construction of project issued Policy Circular
58/2013-14 dated 18th November, 2013 &
Policy Circular 75/ 2016-17 dated July 01,
2016 clearly restricting the financial
institutions to make upfront payment of
loan sanctioned amount to the builders and
further directed the banks to disburse the
loan in accordance with the stages of
construction of project of the builder.
Copy of Policy Circular 58/2013-14 dated
18th November, 2013 & Policy Circular 75/
2016-17 dated July 01, 2016 is annexed
herewith as ANNEXURE – H and
ANNEXURE H-1 respectively.

18. The Petitioner also crave the leave of this

Hon'ble Court to produce additional
 documents as and when required at a later
stage.

19. It is submitted that the Petitioner has not

filed any other Petition/Appeal/Application
against the same cause of action before
this Hon'ble Court or any other Court and
no other proceedings remain pending in any
jurisdictional court relating to the same
cause of action.

20. Having no other alternative and efficacious

remedy, the Petitioner has preferred the
instant writ petition on the following
amongst other grounds.

GROUNDS

21. That as per the Tripartite Agreement

entered into between Petitioner and the
Respondent No.6 to 7, it is crystal clear
that in the event the project is shelved by
the Builder/Respondent No.7 or the
booking is cancelled by the
 Builder/Respondent No.7 or for any reason
what so ever the Respondent No.6/Bank is
entitled to recover all the money from the
Respondent No.7/Builder which includes
the money due to the Petitioner being paid
by the Petitioner himself and also the loan
amount disbursed by the Respondent No.6
directly to the Respondent Nos. 7. Since
the petitioner has withdrawn from the
purchase of the said unit the Respondent
No.6 is entitled to recover all dues from the
Respondent No.7 in terms of Tripartite
Agreement.

22. Because Respondent Nos. 6 to 7 in

collusion with each other have defrauded
the petitioner and many bonafide
purchasers like petitioners who had put up
their life savings with the dream of having
a house for themselves and their family.

23. Because the conduct of Respondent No. 6

is demanding EMI’s from the petitioner
despite being aware that it is the
 Respondent No. 7 who is actually liable to
pay the EMI’s and Loan Amount to the
Respondent No. 6 is not only arbitrary but
is prima facie illegal. This collusion
between the Respondent No. 6 and
Respondent No. 7 has called upon the need
of the intervention of the Hon’ble Court.

24. It is submitted that, the Respondent No.6

in terms of Tripartite Agreement, executed
between the Petitioner and Respondent
No.6 and 7, ought to have collected the
EMI’s and Loan amount from the
Respondent No. 6 however due to collusion
between the Respondent Nos. 6 and 7, the
Respondent No. 6 is targeting the
Petitioner without existing the legal remedy
of recovering the dues of loan from the
Respondent No.7.

25. It is submitted that this action of the

Respondent No. 6 and 7 affects larger
public interest because banks and builders
collude with each other in order to burden
 the homebuyers for repayment, whereas to
its contrary, the Developer/builder
continues to remain evasive of possession
of flat to the Petitioner as well as the EMI’s
and loan amount to the financial institution
due to which the Petitioner is constrained
to knock upon the doors of this Hon’ble
Court.

26. It is submitted that the Respondent No. 6

has to act strictly as per the guidelines
issued by the Respondent No. 3, and
Respondent No. 4 who constantly issued
guidelines to said financial institutions like
Respondent No. 6. It is further submitted
that the Respondent No. 6 is a financial
institution and operates towards a larger
public interest under the umbrella of
Respondent No. 3, however the gross
conduct by the Respondent No. 6 has led
to the demand for intervention of the
Hon’ble Court.
27. The Petitioners crave the leave of this
Hon'ble Court to raise additional grounds
and defense in support of their case at the
time of arguments.

GROUNDS FOR INTERIM PRAYER

28. It is submitted that the Petitioner has long

ago withdrew themselves from the flat in
question of the Respondent No. 7, yet the
Respondent No. 6 continues to raise their
demands for EMI’s towards the unit in
question, and further the loan amount
from the Petitioner despite being aware
that it is the Respondent No. 7 who is
actually liable to said the loan amount and
EMI’s to Respondent No. 7 with respect to
loan account No. 0024675100028857. It is
further submitted that as per the Tri-Partite
Agreement executed between the
Petitioner and Respondent Nos. 6 and 7, it
is the Respondent No. 7 who is liable to
clear the loan amount to Respondent No.
6, however the Respondent No. 6
 continues to harass the Petitioner in terms
of Loan amount and EMI’s towards unit in
question, which has led to the immediate
intervention of the Hon’ble Court failing
which the Petitioner shall remain
remediless and the Respondent Nos. 6 and
7 will continue to harass the Petitioner and
their family members qua loan amount. It
is further submitted that if Respondent
No.6 is not restrained from taking coercive
actions against the petitioner, then the
Petitioner would suffer irreparable loss
which would affect the CIBIL score of the
Petitioner and would result in multiple
cases before various Courts & Tribunals.

PRAYER

WHEREFORE, it is most respectfully prayed

that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to:

a.Issue a writ in the nature of mandamus or

any other appropriate writ, order or
direction, thereby restraining the
 Respondent No.6/ financial institution from
taking any punitive action against the
Petitioner vide loan account No.
0024675100028857.

b. Issue a writ in the nature of mandamus or

any other appropriate writ, order or
direction to the Respondent No.6/financial
institution to recover the loan amount,
EMI’s and the interests/penalty from the
Respondent No. 7.

c. Directing the Respondent No.6 to thereby

assist the Respondent No.5, to rectify the
CIBIL Score of the Petitioner by removing
the outstanding amount vide loan account
No. 0024675100028857.

d. Any other relief that this Hon'ble Court may

deem fit and proper in the facts and
circumstances of the case and in the
interests of justice and equity in favor of
the Petitioner and against the Respondents.
It is prayed accordingly.
 INTERIM PRAYER

29. For the reasons stated in the paragraph 28

of the present petition, this Hon'ble Court
be pleased to restrain the Respondent No.6
from demanding/collecting any further
EMI’s from the Petitioner either by
presenting the Electronic Clearance System
(ECS) or by presenting the security
cheques issued by the Petitioner and
further not to initiate/continue any sort of
precipitative action in the form of any civil,
criminal or SARFAESI proceedings in order
to recover the purported loan outstanding
against the Petitioner herein with respect
to loan account No. 0024675100028857
pending disposal of the present petition,
and direct the Respondent No. 5 from
ensuring that the Petitioner's CIBIL score
remain unaffected pending disposal of the
present petition, in the interests of justice
and equity.
BANGALORE
 DATED: __/06/2024 ADVOCATE FOR
PETITIONER

ADDRESS OF SERVICE:
NITIN GOEL, MAYANK GOEL
MNG LAW OFFICE,
No. #318, First Floor,
15th Cross, 6th Main Road,
Sadashivanagar, Bengaluru – 560080
E: mnglawoffice@gmail.com
PH: +91-9999340256
: +91-9958617492

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT

BENGALURU
WRIT PETITION No. ______/2024 (GM - RES)
BETWEEN:
HARSHIT MOHAN …PETITIONER
AND:

M/S LANDSTAR HOMES & ORS. …RESPONDENTS

VERIFYING AFFIDAVIT
I, Harshit mohan, S/o Shri brij mohan shrivastava
R/o A 008, CMRS Royal Orchid Apartment, Balagere
Road, Arthur, Bangalore, Karnataka- 560087 aged
about ___ years, presently at Bangalore, the SPA
holder, do hereby solemnly affirm and declare as
under:

1 I state that I am the SPA holder of the

Petitioner in the above writ petition and well
conversant with the facts and circumstances of
 the case. Hence, I am swearing this affidavit on
behalf of the petitioner.

2 I state that the statements made in paras 1 to

29 of the writ petition are true and correct.

3 I state that Annexure A to H1 are the true

copies of the originals.

I swear that what is stated above are true and

correct to the best of my knowledge, information
and belief.

IDENTIFIED BY ME:
DEPONENT
ADVOCATE
BENGALURU,
DATED: __/06/2024