- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1850 WP No. 200896 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, KALABURAGI BENCH DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF MARCH, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE WRIT PETITION NO.200896 OF 2025 (GM-RES) BETWEEN: 1. AIJAZ PASHA S/O SAMSUDDIN, AGE: 50 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS, R/O H.NO.2-2-4/11, OPP. MAHILA SAMAJ, HRB LAYOUT, TQ. & DIST.RAICHUR. 2. DILSHAD BEGUM W/O AIJAZ PASHA, AGE: 45 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD, R/O H.NO.2-2-4/11, OPP. MAHILA SAMAJ, HRB LAYOUT, TQ. & DIST. RAICHUR. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. LIYAQAT FAREED USTAD, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. AUTHORIZED OFFICER OF BAJAJ FINANCE LTD., HAVING REGISTERED OFFICE AT BAJAJ AUTO LTD. COMPLEX, MUMBAI-PUNE ROAD, AKURDI, PUNE-411 035. 2. THE MANAGER, BAJAJ FINANCE LTD., MAHABALESHWAR CIRCLE, CITY TAKIES ROAD, RAICHUR-584 104. …RESPONDENTS Digitally signed by BASALINGAPPA SHIVARAJ DHUTTARGAON Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1850 WP No. 200896 of 2025 THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO, (A) ISSUE THE WRIT IN NATURE OF MANDAMUS DIRECTING THE RESPONDENT TO CONSIDER LETTER DATED 17.03.2025 VIDE ANNEXURE-G AND SETTLE THE LOAN AMOUNT. (B) ISSUE ANY OTHER DIRECTIONS AS THIS HON’BLE COURT DEEMS FIT UNDER FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE ORAL ORDER (PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE) Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners. 2. The petitioners are seeking a writ of mandamus to consider the letter dated 17.03.2025 marked at Annexure-G, where they have made an effort to settle the dues payable to the respondents. It is their grievance that the said letter is not yet considered. 3. It is noticed that the respondents are private entities. Prima facie, the writ petition is not maintainable. - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1850 WP No. 200896 of 2025 4. It is also noticed that the respondents have not taken any action to sell the property of the petitioners to recover the alleged dues. It is stated that the possession is taken in terms of possession notice at Annexure-C. The petitioners claim that they are still in possession. 5. In case the petitioners are aggrieved by the notice issued under Section 13(2) of the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002, they have to approach the competent authority, assailing the said notice. Hence, the writ petition at this juncture is not maintainable and the same is accordingly dismissed. 6. In case there is any threat of alienation of the property, the petitioners are at liberty to seek appropriate relief before the appropriate forum. Sd/- (ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE) JUDGE LG List No.: 2 Sl No.: 29