- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33282 WP No. 16535 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S SUNIL DUTT YADAV WRIT PETITION NO. 16535 OF 2025 (GM-RES) BETWEEN: 1. H RANGASWAMY ANAND S/O. T.S. RANGASWAMY NAIDU AGED 62 YEARS, R/AT NO. 82/42, 2ND FLOOR 1ST MAIN, 1ST CROSS, NEAR ULLAL SIGNAL OPP: JNANABHARATHI BUS STOP ULLAL MAIN ROAD BANGALORE-560 056 REPRESENTED BY HIS GPA HOLDER ARUNA, W/O. L.K. DEVRAJ, 45 YEARS. … PETITIONER (BY SRI. KARUMBAIAH T.A., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. NKGSB CO-OPERATIVE BANK LIMITED SESHADRIPURAM BRANCH NO. 173, 1ST MAIN RAOD, SESHADRIPLURAM BENGALURU-560 020 REP. BY ITS MANAGER. 2. THE AUTHORIZED OFFICER AND CHIEF MANAGER NKGSB CO-OPERATIVE BANK LIMITED SESHADRIPURAM BRANCH NO. 173, OM SHELTERS, J. LINGAIAH ROAD, 1ST MAIN ROAD, Digitally signed by VIDYA G R Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33282 WP No. 16535 of 2025 SESHADRIPURAM BENGALURU-560 020 … RESPONDENTS THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH ANNEXURE-D THE EVICTION NOTICE DTD. 30.01.2025 BEARING NO. NKGSB/109/H.R.ANAND/48/2024-25 ISSUED BY THE R-2 AND ALL THE FURTHER PROCEEDINGS AND ETC. THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S SUNIL DUTT YADAV ORAL ORDER After hearing the matter for sometime, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner may be relegated to avail of the substantive remedy as provided under the SARFAESI Act. 2. In light of the said submission, the petitioner is relegated to avail of the substantive remedy as regards the impugned proceedings. All contentions of both the sides are kept open. 3. It would meet the ends of justice by directing the respondent - Bank not to take any precipitative steps for a period of four weeks from today. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33282 WP No. 16535 of 2025 4. The interim protection granted under this order is only to enable the petitioner to avail of the substantive remedy and must not be considered to be an order passed on the basis of adjudication on merits. Upon the lapse of the time stipulated, the protection granted would cease to operate and the authorities before whom petitioner may approach are to look at the matter afresh uninfluenced by the observations made herein. 5. Needless to state that while considering the aspect of limitation, in the event the proceedings are instituted before the DRT, time spent before this Court may be taken note of appropriately. 6. Accordingly, petition is disposed off. Sd/- (S SUNIL DUTT YADAV) JUDGE VP