- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:36925 WP No. 28168 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO. 28168 OF 2025 (GM-RES) BETWEEN: 1. SMT BHAGYA LAKSHMI R W/O RAJA M AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS, 2. SRI RAJA M S/O MATHIYAN AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, BOTH PETITIONERS NO.1 & 2 ARE RESIDING AT NO.275/18, 8TH MAIN ROAD, 15TH CROSS, LAKKASANDRA EXTENSION, WILSON GARDEN, BANGALORE 560030. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. S. VIVEKREDDY, SENIOR ADVOCATE FOR SRI. CHANDPASHA.,ADVOCATE) Digitally signed by VANAMALA N Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:36925 WP No. 28168 of 2025 AND: SRI GURU RAGHAVENDRA SAHAKARA BANK NIYAMITHA REGISTERED UNDER KARNATAKA CO OPERATIVE SOCIETIES ACT 1959, HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT 15, SUBBARAMA CHETTY ROAD, NETKALLAPPA CIRCLE, BASAVANAGUDI, BANGALORE 560004. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI.SURESH V., ADVOCATE FOR SRI. N.L. MAHESHWARA PRASAD, ADVOCATE FOR C/R) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUION OF INDIA PRAYING TO A) ISSUE ANY WRIT IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI OR ORDER OR DIRECTION SETTING ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 21.07.2025 PASSED IN CRL. MISC NO. 4610/2025 ON THE FILE OF THE IX ADDL. CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE AT BANGALORE CITY VIDE ANNEXURE-A AND CONSEQUENTLY QUASH THE NOTICE DATED 10.09.2025 BEARING NO. SGR/MS/H- 281/1330/2025-26 VIDE . ANNEXURE-B; B) ISSUE ANY WRIT IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS OR ANY OTHER APPROPRIATE WRIT OR ORDER OR - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:36925 WP No. 28168 of 2025 DIRECTION QUASHING THE NOTICE DATED 10.12.2024 BEARING NO. SGR/SK/1648/LN196/2024-25 VIDE ANNEXURE-F; C) ISSUE ANY WRIT IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS OR ANY OTHER APPROPRIATE WRIT OR ORDER OR DIRECTION, DECLARING THAT THE DEMAND NOTICE DATED 20.12.2022 ISSUED UNDER SECTION 13(2) OF THE SARFAESI ACT, 2002 WHICH HAS BEEN NEVER SERVED UPON THE PETITIONERS AND THE CONSEQUENTIAL PROCEEDINGS INITIATED THERE UNDER CULMINATING IN THE IMPUGNED ORDER AND POSSESSION NOTICE, ARE ILLEGAL, ARBITRARY, AND LIABLE TO BE SET ASIDE; D) ISSUE ANY WRIT IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS OR ANY OTHER APPROPRIATE WRIT OR ORDER OR DIRECTION DECLARING THAT THE STATEMENT OF ACCOUNTS DATED 01.07.2023 PREPARED BY RESPONDENT BANK CLAIMING NON EXISTENCE LOANS AND INFLATED AMOUNTS ARE ILLEGAL, ARBITRARY AND SAME IS LIABLE TO BE SETASIDE VIDE ANNEXURE E TO E2; E) ISSUE ANY WRIT IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS OR ANY OTHER APPROPRIATE WRIT OR ORDER OR DIRECTION, RESTRAINING THE RESPONDENT FROM TAKING - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:36925 WP No. 28168 of 2025 ANY COERCIVE ACTION/STEPS AGAINST THE SCHEDULE PROPERTY. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD ORAL ORDER The petitioners are aggrieved by the respondent commencing proceedings under the provisions of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 [for short, 'the SARFAESI Act'], and the petitioners have called in question the order dated 21.07.2025 in Crl.Misc.No.4610/2025 on the file of the IX Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bengaluru [for short, 'the learned Magistrate']. The learned Magistrate has appointed a member of the Bar as Court Commissioner to assist the respondent in taking possession of the secured asset [a vacant site - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:36925 WP No. 28168 of 2025 within the limits of Parappana Agrahara Village, Begur Hobli, Bengaluru South Taluk - the subject property]. 2. Sri Vivek Subba Reddy, the learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners, submits that this Court must, in exercise of extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, intervene and quash the learned Magistrate‘s impugned order dated 21.07.2025 in the following circumstances: [a] A Hon'ble Minister, responding to a question on the floor of the House, has stated that the outstanding from the petitioners to the respondent is in a sum of Rs.53,40,870/- [as of 04.07.2023]; [b] The respondent has initiated proceedings under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act with the learned Magistrate asserting that the petitioner will have to pay a sum of Rs.2,46,74,546/- as of 31.10.2024; - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:36925 WP No. 28168 of 2025 [c] The respondent asserts that the petitioners have availed three loans but the petitioners have availed only two loans; [d] The third loan, which is as per the Statement of Accounts at Annexure-E, pertains to an account to which the petitioners are not parties; [e] It is common practice with the respondent to have shown loans to the credit of third parties with a concerned drawing the amount to the disadvantage of those concerned. [f] The petitioners are not served with any notice as is contemplated under Section 13 of the SARFAESI Act. 3. Sri Suresh V., the learned counsel who appears on behalf of Sri Maheshwara Prasad N.L. who is on record for the respondent, submits that none of these aspects can be examined in the present - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:36925 WP No. 28168 of 2025 proceedings and he can justify, on behalf of the respondent, that necessary notices have been issued as contemplated under Section 13 of the SARFAESI Act before proceeding to apply under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act with the learned Magistrate. The learned counsel also submits that the e-auction notice is published by the respondent for the sale of the subject property and that the auction is scheduled to be held on 20.09.2025. 4. In rejoinder, Sri Vivek Subba Reddy submits that his instructions are that the petitioner is not made known of any such sale and the learned Senior Counsel further submits that if this Court is not inclined to interfere under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and is inclined to relegate the petitioners to work out their remedies under Section 17 of the SARFAESI Act, this Court must ensure that there is some protection to the petitioners in the - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:36925 WP No. 28168 of 2025 interregnum as against dispossession and creation of third party interest because of the scheduled auction. 5. The petitioners propose to rely upon a certain statement made on the floor of the House but the context in which the statement is made and the details upon which the statement is made must be duly verified in an enquiry that will be part of the proceedings under Section 17 of the SARFAESI Act. Similarly, the DRT will have to examine whether the petitioners can vindicate their stand that they are not parties to the loan in Account No.102200001176, which they call a fictitious account. This Court must now recall the oft-repeated caution against interfering under Article 226 of the Constitution of India when the concerned have an efficacious alternative remedy under Section 17 thereof. 6. As such, this Court is indeed not inclined to interfere under Article 226 of the Constitution of - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:36925 WP No. 28168 of 2025 India to quash the impugned order or annul the proceedings thus far under the SARFAESI Act. The petitioners must work out their remedies in such procedure, and all questions must be left open to be considered. The next question is, should this Court extend any protection as against sale and dispossession of the subject property over some reasonable time so that the petitioners can avail their alternative remedy. 7. This Court, on a careful consideration, is of the view that the respondent and every person who claims under the respondent must defer measures to take immediate possession of the property for some reasonable time, and insofar as the scheduled e- auction, the petitioners must avail their remedy at the earliest and there cannot be an unconditional embargo. In the light of the afore, the following: - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:36925 WP No. 28168 of 2025 ORDER [a] The petition stands disposed of relegating the petitioners to avail their alternative remedy under Section 17 of the SARFAESI Act. [b] The respondent, and every person claiming under the respondent, is called upon to defer measures to take possession of the subject property for three [3] weeks from today. [c] The respondent is also called upon to ensure that the purchaser, if any, in the proposed auction is made known of the petitioners' grievance with the proceedings and this shall be made known prior to the offer that is received [d] It is needless to observe that all questions are left open to be considered in the proceeding under Section 17 of the - 11 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:36925 WP No. 28168 of 2025 SARFAESI Act that the petitioners may avail. Sd/- (B M SHYAM PRASAD) JUDGE SA ct:sr