- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:5379 WP No. 100435 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF MARCH, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI MULIMANI WRIT PETITION NO. 100435 OF 2025 (GM-RES) BETWEEN: 1. MAHAMMADYUSUF.M.CHAND, AGE. 53 YEARS, OCC. BUSINESS, R/O. WD.NO.5, SIDRAPUR GALLI, JAMKHANDI ROAD, MUDHOL, DIST. BAGALKOT-587 313. 2. AMEENA.M.CHAND AGE. 43 YEARS, OCC. HOUSEHOLD, R/O. WD.NO.5, SIDRAPUR GALLI, JAMKHANDI ROAD, MUDHOL, DIST. BAGALKOT-587 313. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. SABEEL AHMED., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. CANARA BANK LTD., BAGALKOT REGIONAL OFFICE, REP. BY ITS M.D./CEO/COMPANY SECRETARY, PLOT NO.33 AND 35 SECTOR 25, OPP. KEB, NAVNAGAR, BAGALKOT-587 103. 2. CANARA BANK LTD., REP. BY AUTHORIZED OFFICER, BRANCH AT: 1ST FLOOR, LAKAM PLAZA, YADWAD CIRCLE, MUDHOL, BAGALKOT-587 313. …RESPONDENTS (BY MRS. GAYATRI.S.R., ADVOCATE) Digitally signed by PREMCHANDRA M R Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:5379 WP No. 100435 of 2025 THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 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.Sabeel Ahmed., counsel for the petitioners and Smt.Gayatri.S.R., counsel for the respondents have appeared in person. 2. The captioned Writ Petition is filed seeking a Writ of Certiorari to quash the Demand Notice dated:30.08.2024 vide Annexure-F and the Notice of Pre-possession dated:10.12.2024 vide Annexure-H. 3. Counsel for the respective parties urged several contentions. Heard the arguments and perused the writ papers with care. 4. This Court vide order dated:11.02.2025, had extended the interim order subject to the condition that the petitioner would pay the Bank another a sum of Rs.2,50,000/- in the next six weeks. However, the petitioner has not deposited the amount as ordered by this Court. Furthermore, the notices are called into question in this Writ Petition on - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:5379 WP No. 100435 of 2025 several grounds as setout in the Memorandum of Writ Petition. As against the possession notice issued by the respondents, there is an alternate and statutory remedy available by filing an appeal before the DRT. Hence, I decline to exercise power under Writ jurisdiction. 5. Resultantly, the Writ Petition is dismissed. Because of the dismissal of the Writ Petition, all pending interlocutory applications if any are disposed of and the interim order if any granted by this Court stands discharged. Sd/- (JYOTI MULIMANI) JUDGE MRP List No.: 2 Sl No.: 6