- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:31123 WP No. 15725 of 2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R. NATARAJ WRIT PETITION NO.15725 OF 2022 (GM-RES) BETWEEN: 1. SRI RAVIKUMAR S/O RAJU AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS R/AT RAJU MATHUSHRI NILAYA DONABHAGATTA ROAD OLD KAVALAGUNDI BHADRAVATHI-577229 SHIMOGGA DISTRICT. 2. MRS GEETHA B R W/O R RAVIKUMAR MAJOR R/AT RAJU MATHUSHRI NILAYA DONABHAGATTA ROAD OLD KAVALAGUNDI BHADRAVATHI-577229 SHIMOGGA DISTRICT. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. BRYEN STIENBERG, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. JOSE SEBASTIAN, ADVOCATE) AND: M/S DCB BANK LTD REGISTERED UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT, 1956, NO.128, PRESTIGE MERIDIAN ANNEXURE M G ROAD BENGALURU-560 001. REPRESENTED BY BRANCH IN CHARGE / AUTHORISED OFFICER …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. SURESH V, ADVOCATE) Digitally signed by SUMA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:31123 WP No. 15725 of 2022 THIS W.P IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE NOTICE OF POSSESSION DATED 19.02.2022 AND 09.03.2022 AT ANNEXURE-M AND L AND ANY OTHER COERCIVE ACTION TO BRING THE PROPERTY FOR SALE AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R. NATARAJ ORAL ORDER The petitioners have challenged the possession notices dated 19.02.2022 and 09.03.2022 issued under Section 13(4) of the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (for short, ‘SARFAESI Act’). They have also sought for writ in the nature of mandamus to the respondent – bank to consider the request for one time settlement based on the guidelines issued by the RBI during Covid – 19 period and waive off portion of interest and etc. They also have sought for direction to the respondent to consider the payment of Rs.5,00,000/- made towards full and final settlement of all dues. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:31123 WP No. 15725 of 2022 2. A perusal of the reliefs indicate that the petitioners are challenging the proceedings initiated by the respondent – bank under the provisions of the SARFAESI Act. The petitioners have remedy of an appeal under Section 17 of the SARFAESI Act. As held by the Apex Court in the case of Union Bank of India Vs. Satyawati Tondon and others – AIR 2010 SC 3413 and as also held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of South Indian Bank Ltd. & others Vs. Naveen Mathew Philip and others – (2023) 17 SCC 311, this Court cannot exercise jurisdiction when there is alternative and efficacious remedy of appeal available to the petitioner. 3. Therefore, the reliefs sought for by the petitioners in the petition cannot be considered by this Court. Consequently, the writ petition is dismissed on the ground of maintainability. It is however open for the petitioners to pursue the right of appeal before the Appellate Tribunal under Section 17 of SARFAESI Act. The time consumed in pursuing this petition shall be deducted - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:31123 WP No. 15725 of 2022 while calculating the limitation before the Tribunal and the Tribunal shall also consider the fact that the petitioner has paid a sum of Rs.5,00,000/- pursuant to the order passed by this Court dated 05.09.2022, before passing any orders on the application that may be filed by the petitioners challenging the possession notices. Sd/- (R. NATARAJ) JUDGE SV List No.: 1 Sl No.: 5