- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:34149 W.P. No.29107/2018 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 1ST DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R. NATARAJ WRIT PETITION NO.29107/2018 (GM-RES) BETWEEN: 1. SRI. B.V. VIDYANATHA AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS S/O LATE B. VITTAL RAO. 2. SRI. AMITH .V AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS S/O SRI. B.V. VIDYANATHA. BOTH ARE R/AT NO.21 2ND CROSS, 3RD STAGE GOKULAM, MYSURU-570 002. …PETITIONERS (BY SMT. JYOTHI G.B. KANGOKAR, ADV.,) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA DEPARTMENT OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY M.S. BUILDING, AMBEDKAR VEEDHI BANGALORE-560 001 REP. BY ITS SECRETARY. 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER AND DISTRICT MAGISTRATE ATTARA KACHERI OFFICE J.L.B. ROAD, MYSURU DISTRICT MYSURU-570 001. Digitally signed by SUMA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:34149 W.P. No.29107/2018 3. THE NATIONAL CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD., HAVING ITS ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE AT NO.73/1, GANDHIBAZAAR BANGALORE-560 004 REPT. BY ITS AUTHORIZED OFFICER. 4. HARISHKUMAR NAIDU M.V. S/O LATE VENUGOPAL NAIDU NO.3/1, 5TH MAIN 7TH CROSS, VINAYAK NAGAR MYSURU-570 012. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. SRINIVAS KUMAR, HCGP FOR R1 & R2 SRI. CHANDRASHEKAR C. CHANASPUR, ADV., FOR R3 R4 SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED) THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO DECLARE THAT THE ORDER PASSED BY THE DISTRICT COMMISSIONER AND DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, MYSURU, THE 2ND RESPONDENT IN MAG(3) MISC/98/2017 ON 14.12.2017 PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-V DIRECTING THE RESPONDENT NO.3 TO TAKE PHYSICAL POSSESSION OF THE SCHEDULE PROPERTY WITH THE HELP OF THE POLICE UNDER SECTION 14 OF SARFAESI ACT I.E. UNDER THE PROVISION OF THE SECURITIZATION AND RECONSTRUCTION OF FINANCIAL ASSETS AND ENFORCEMENT OF SECURITY INTEREST ACT 2002 AND RULES (ACT54/2002) AS ILLEGAL AND QUASH THE SAME, IN SO FAR AS THE PETITIONERS ARE CONCERNED PERTAINING TO THE SCHEDULE PROPERTY & ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:34149 W.P. No.29107/2018 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R. NATARAJ ORAL ORDER The petitioner has challenged an order dated 14.12.2017 passed by the respondent No.2 in MAG(3) Misc/98/2017 to permitting the respondent No.3 to take physical possession of the schedule property with the help of the police under Section 14 of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (henceforth referred to as ‘The SARFAESI Act, 2002’ for short). 2. It appears that the petitioners were tenants in a secured asset belonging to the respondent No.3, against which the respondent No.3 initiated Court proceedings under the SARFAESI Act, 2002. It also appears that the respondent No.3 had filed a petition under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act, 2002, to take possession and that the same culminated in the order impugned in this writ petition. The petitioners claim that they were not heard before the impugned order was passed. 3. It is now well settled that any person aggrieved by the order passed or any steps taken under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act, 2002 has to work out his/her remedy before the - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:34149 W.P. No.29107/2018 Tribunal in accordance with Section 17 of the SARFAESI Act, 2002. Any person includes a tenant who purportedly is in possession of a secured asset. This is the law declared by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the case of Vimala Bhushan vs. The Authorised Officer, Yes Bank Limited, Mumbai and Others - [ILR 2019 KAR 2520]. 4. In view of the above, the petition is dismissed as not maintainable. However, it is open for the petitioners to work out their remedy by filing appropriate proceedings before the Tribunal in accordance with law. It is needless to mention that any interim order passed by this Court, including the order dated 21.07.2025 will not come in the way of the Tribunal considering any challenge, in accordance with law. The time taken in pursuing this petition shall be excluded while calculating the limitation applicable. 5. The possession of the petitioners shall not be disturbed for a period of thirty days, within which time, the petitioners shall prefer proceedings before the Tribunal. It is made clear that if the proceedings are not initiated before the - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:34149 W.P. No.29107/2018 Tribunal within thirty days, the respondent No.3 is at liberty to proceed in accordance with law. Sd/- (R. NATARAJ) JUDGE BKN/List No.: 1 Sl No.: 13