- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:29972 WP No. 23145 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO. 23145 OF 2025 (GM-RES) BETWEEN: SRI SIDDAMALLESHWAR BASAVAIAH SONOF SRI BASAVAIAH AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS PERMANENTLY RESIDING AT NO. 05, 2ND FLOOR, SITE NO. 37, 6TH MAIN KSRTC LAYOUT CHIKKALASANDRA, BENGALURU 560 061. ALSO AT FLAT NO. 401, 4TH FLOOR, KRISHNA SPRINGS INTERECTION OF RESERVOIR STREET AND K R ROAD, BASAVANAGUDI BENGALURU. ALSO AT SBS TRANSIT PTE LTD TAN KAH KEE, MRT STATION BUKIT TIMAH ROAD SINGAPROE 650249 ALSO AT SBS TRANSIT PTE LTD TAN KAH KEE MRT STATION BUKIT RTIMAH ROAD SINGAPRE 65024. …PETITIONER (BY M.S KUSUM JAIN., ADVOCATE FOR SRI. BHARATH K., ADVOCATE ) Digitally signed by VANAMALA N Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:29972 WP No. 23145 of 2025 AND: STATE BANK OF INDIA FORMED UNDER STATE BANK OF INDIKA ACT 1955 HAVING ITS CORPORATE CENTRE AT MADAME CAME ROAD NARIMAN POINT MUMBAI 400021 AND ALL BRANCH ALL OVER INIDA INTER ALIA RACPC MALLESHWRAM BENGALURU NO. 97, RAILWAY PARALLEL ROAD KUMAR APARK WEST BENGALURU - 560 020 REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF MANAGER SRI K C MANJUNATH …RESPONDENT (BY SRI.VIGNESH SHETTY., ADVOCATE) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO-QUASH/ SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 12.06.2025 PASSED BY THE II ADDL. CHIEF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE, BENGALURU IN CRL. MISC. NO. 2396/2025 IN AS PER ANNEXURE-A. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:29972 WP No. 23145 of 2025 ORAL ORDER The petitioner is aggrieved by the orders under Section 14 of the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 [for short, 'the SARFAESI Act'] by the II Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru [for short, 'the Magistrate Court'] in Misc.No.2396/2025. The respondent's application under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act is allowed by the Magistrate Court appointing a learned member of the Bar as the Court Commissioner to take possession of the subject property with consequential directions. Ms.Kusum Jain, the learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that this Court must intervene with the impugned order because the respondent, despite knowing that the petitioner, who has availed home loan in excess of Rs.2 crores, is working in - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:29972 WP No. 23145 of 2025 Singapore, has not taken any measures to ensure that notice is duly served on the petitioner. Mr.Vignesh S. Shetty, the learned counsel for the respondent, is heard and this Court is of the opinion that there is no reason for interference in the present proceedings because every cause pleaded [including the lack of notice] is a cause that would be available for the petitioner under Section 17 of the SARFAESI Act. Hence, leaving open all contentions, the petition stands disposed of with just exceptions to the petitioner. Sd/- (B M SHYAM PRASAD) JUDGE SA ct:sr