- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:7848 WP No. 8156 of 2020 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI MULIMANI WRIT PETITION NO. 8156 OF 2020 (GM-RES) BETWEEN: MRS. TRUPTHI SHETTY W/O MR. LOKESH SHETTY, AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS, RESIDING AT VINCENTRE PALACE, FLAT NO.202, 2ND FLOOR, DOOR NO.10/94/28, NEAR MESCOM PRANTHYA VILLAGE, MOODABIDRE TALUK, MANGALURU. D.K.DISTRICT-575 002. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. STEEPHEN MATHEW., ADVOCATE FOR SRI. KARUNAKARA.P., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, VIKASA SOUDHA, BENGALURU-560 001. 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, MANGALURU, DAKSHINA KANNADA, MANGALURU-575 001. 3. THE TAHASILDHAR, MOODABIDRE TALUK, MOODABIDRE. Digitally signed by PREMCHANDRA M R Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:7848 WP No. 8156 of 2020 4. THE MANAGER, CANARA BANK, GURUPURA, KAIKAMBRA BRANCH, MANGALURU, D.K. DISTRICT. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. MANJUNATHA RAYAPPA., AGA FOR R1 TO 3; R4-SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, SEEKING CERTAIN RELIEFS. THIS WRIT PETITION IS LISTED FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, AN ORDER IS MADE AS UNDER: ORAL ORDER Sri.Steephen Mathew., counsel on behalf of Sri.Karunakara.P., for the petitioner and Sri.Manjunatha Rayappa., AGA for respondents 1 to 3 have appeared in person. 2. The captioned Writ Petition is filed seeking following reliefs: (a) To quash or set aside the Order dated:07.03.2020 passed by the Deputy Commissioner - the second respondent in No.MAG(2)CR.901/2019/84358/C4 vide Annexure-A. - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:7848 WP No. 8156 of 2020 (b) To set aside the order dated:18.03.2020 passed by the third respondent in M.A.G.C.R./270/2019-20. 3. Counsel for the respective parties urged several contentions. Heard the arguments and perused the Writ papers with care. 4. The District Magistrate, Dakshina Kannada District, Mangaluru in exercise of the power conferred under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act, 2002 directed the Tahsildar to take possession of the property in question. The order is passed under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act. Suffice it to note that as against the order passed under Section 14 of the Act, there is an alternate and statutory remedy of filing an appeal before the DRT. Hence, I decline to exercise the power under Writ jurisdiction. 5. Resultantly, the Writ Petition is dismissed. Sd/- (JYOTI MULIMANI) JUDGE MRP List No.: 2 Sl No.: 10