- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33965 WP No. 24784 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 1ST DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO. 24784 OF 2025 (GM-RES) BETWEEN: 1. M/S. KITCHEN NO. 10A, IST FLOOR, 8TH CROSS, 5TH MAIN MALLESHPALAYA, BANGALORE -560 75. NEW THIPPASANDRA POST, BANGALORE - 560 075 REP BY PROPRIETORS. 2. MR. SURESH DEVADIGA S/O GOPAL DEVADIGA AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS, R/A NO.10A, MADHU NIVAS 1ST FLOOR, 5TH MAIN 8TH CROSS, MALLESHPALYA BANGALORE - 560 075. 3. MRS. SHWETHA DEVADIGA W/O SURESH DEVADIGA AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS, R/A NO.10A, MADHU NIVAS 1ST FLOOR, 5TH MAIN Digitally signed by VANAMALA N Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33965 WP No. 24784 of 2025 8TH CROSS, MALLESHPALYA BANGALORE-560 075. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. SATHISHA D J.,ADVOCATE) AND: THE CITY UNION BANK LIMITED CREDIT RECOVERY AND MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT REP BY AUTHORIZED OFFICER R/A NARAYANA, ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE NO.24-B, GANDHI NAGAR, KUMBAKONAM 612001. …RESPONDENT THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE WRIT OF CERTIORARI OR ANY OTHER APPROPRIATE WRIT, ORDER OR DIRECTION QUASHING THE IMPUGNED NOTICE AT ANNEXURE-H, DATED 9.7.2025 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT CITY UNION BANK LTD, U/S 13(2) OF SARFAESI ACT 2002. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33965 WP No. 24784 of 2025 ORAL ORDER The petitioners admittedly are borrowers from the first respondent, and they are aggrieved by the first respondent issuing notice under Section 13[2] of the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 [for short, 'the SARFAESI Act']. The impugned Notice dated 09.07.2025 [Annexure-H], while adverting the details of the two loans availed by the petitioners as 'a Term loan and 'a secured overdraft', has stipulated that as of 04.04.2025 the amount due was in a sum of Rs.1,07,65,197/- and that the petitioners can clear the dues within sixty days. The impugned notice also stipulates that if there is failure in complying, the proceedings will be initiated under Section 13[4] of the SARFAESI Act. Sri Sathisha D J, the learned counsel for the petitioners, submits that this Court must intervene - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33965 WP No. 24784 of 2025 because the petitioners can demonstrate that the Term loan is closed and a substantial part of the secured overdraft is also paid but without disclosing the computation, the impugned notice is issued. The learned counsel also submits that the petitioners are willing to sit across the table with the first respondent/his officers and close the loan. This Court must observe that the details of the payments made and the consequential computation, if necessary to be examined, are all questions of facts that must be examined and the efficacious remedy must be under Section 17 of the SARFAESI Act. Further, the petitioners can cause response to the impugned notice bringing forth the circumstances and if despite a justifiable cause, further proceedings are initiated, the petitioners must avail their remedy under Section 17 of the SARFAESI Act. There is no reason for interference in the present petition. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33965 WP No. 24784 of 2025 Therefore, subject to all just exceptions, the petition stands disposed of. Sd/- (B M SHYAM PRASAD) JUDGE AN/-