- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:200 WP No. 31106 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R DEVDAS WRIT PETITION NO. 31106 OF 2024 (GM-RES) BETWEEN: MRS. ASHA G.L., W/O MR. LAKSMINARAYANA GUBBA, AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS, NO. 222, MATHA NILAYA, 5TH MAIN ROAD, BSK 3RD STAGE, BENGALURU 560 085 …PETITIONER (BY SRI. S. BALARAJU, ADVOCATE) AND: M/S. STATE BANK OF INDIA, STRESSED ASSET RECOVERY BRANCH, 11/90, III FLOOR, NEAR OLD SHIVAJI THEATRE, J.C. ROAD, BENGALURU 560 002, REP. BY ITS AUTHORISED OFFICER. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. NANDISH PATIL, ADVOCATE) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH POSSESSION NOTICE DATED 18.09.2024 AT ANNEXURE -B Digitally signed by DHARMALINGAM Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:200 WP No. 31106 of 2024 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT SO PETITIONER IS CONCERNED AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R DEVDAS ORAL ORDER By order dated 21.11.2024, this Court had directed the respondent-Bank not to take any precipitiative action, if the petitioner were to deposit 10% of the outstanding amount within four weeks from the date of the order and the petitioner has not complied with the directions. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is ready with a cheque of her brother for a sum of Rs.10 Lakhs. Learned counsel for the respondent-Bank submits that the outstanding amount is about Rs.3.5 Crores. Therefore, the directions issued by this Court have not been complied with. 3. Having regard to the fact that a person aggrieved of any action sought to be taken by the Bank under the provisions of the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:200 WP No. 31106 of 2024 Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (for short 'SARFAESI Act') can challenge the same before the Debts Recovery Tribunal and directions have been issued by the Hon'ble Supreme Court that the High Court should not entertain such writ petitions and the fact that there is non- compliance of the orders passed by this Court, this Court is of the considered opinion that no relief can be granted to the petitioner. Accordingly, the writ petition stands dismissed. Sd/- (R DEVDAS) JUDGE rv List No.: 1 Sl No.: 12 CT:SNN