- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:45073 WP No. 28055 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI WRIT PETITION NO. 28055 OF 2023 (GM-DRT) BETWEEN: SRI RIZWAN AMEER S/O M AMEER MOHAMMED, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, R/AT NO.333, 16TH CROSS, 4TH MAIN, RAJ MAHAL VILAS, II STAGE, BENGALURU – 560 094. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. RAJASHEKAR S, ADVOCATE) AND: THE STATE BANK OF INDIA, STRESSED ASSETS RECOVERY BRANCH, 11/90, III FLOOR, NEAR OLD SHIVAJI THEATRE, Digitally signed by MEGHA MOHAN Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:45073 WP No. 28055 of 2023 J.C. ROAD, BENGALURU – 560 002. REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORIZED OFFICER AND CHIEF MANAGER …RESPONDENT (BY SMT. DIVYA PURANDAR, ADVOCATE) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE POSSESSION NOTICE DTD 02.12.2023 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT BANK VIDE ANNEXURE-A. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:45073 WP No. 28055 of 2023 ORAL ORDER The present writ petition is filed seeking the following prayer: “Wherefore the petitioner most humbly pray that in the interest of justice the Hon’ble Court be pleased to:- a) Issue a writ of certiorari to quash the possession notice dated 02.12.2023 issued by the respondent/bank vide Annexure-A. b) Grant such other and further reliefs as this Hon’ble Court deems fit and proper under the facts and circumstances of the case in the interest of justice.” 2. The facts of the case are that the petitioner and one Mr. Syed Hussain are the absolute owners of the property and they are residing at site No.5, PID No.2-245-5, Assessment No.296 in No.38, Poornapura Village, Bengaluru North Taluk, now called 1st Cross, Pipeline Road, MES Road, Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike, Ward No.2, Yeshawantapur, Bengaluru, with building thereon. They have obtained a loan of an amount of Rs.41,00,000/- from the respondent/bank on 17.11.2007. The petitioner and the co-applicant have repaid the credit to the bank in a total sum of Rs.86,32,903/- through 140 installments on various dates. The first installment of an amount of Rs.29,442/- was paid on 08.03.2008 and the last installment of an amount of Rs.7,500/- was paid on - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:45073 WP No. 28055 of 2023 12.08.2021. It is the case that inspite of paying the entire amount, the bank had initiated the proceedings under Section 13(2) of the SARFAESI Act and the demand notice was issued on 11.10.2021. Upon receipt of demand notice, the petitioner had sent reply on 25.10.2021. It is the case of the petitioner that when he had given a reply to the notice under Section 13(2) of the SARFAESI Act, the respondent/bank had not replied referring to the grounds that are raised in the said reply and in a mechanical manner now a notice under Section 13(4) of the SARFAESI Act is issued by the respondent/bank which is challenged before this Court. 3. When this matter came up on 14.12.2023 before the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court for “preliminary hearing”, an interim order was granted directing the petitioner to deposit an amount of Rs.3,50,000/- within a period of three weeks from the date of order and another sum of Rs.3,50,000/- within another three weeks thereafter and any deviation in paying the amount within the timeline as stipulated, even on the first instance, would entail vacation of the interim order and would also run the risk of dismissal of the petition itself. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:45073 WP No. 28055 of 2023 4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that as per the order, they have deposited the amount on 23.01.2024. It is the contention of the learned counsel appearing for the respondent/bank that the amount is deposited before this Court. Hence, they have come up with this application seeking permission to withdraw the amount. It is submitted that the petitioner ought to have deposited the amount with the bank and it cannot be deposited before this Court. It is submitted that in the reply that is given by them they have categorically mentioned how much amount is outstanding and how the account is declared as NPA. It is submitted that when notice under Section 13(4) is issued, the petitioner has an effective remedy of approaching the Debt Recovery Tribunal under Section 17 of the SARFAESI Act. It is submitted that there are no grounds to interfere with the possession notice which is impugned before this Court. 5. In response to that, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that as far as the I.A. that is filed seeking permission to withdraw the amount, it is submitted that he wants to file his objections. It is further submitted that - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:45073 WP No. 28055 of 2023 declaring his account as NPA itself is illegal as he has already paid the amounts. 6. Having heard the learned counsel on either side, perused the material on record. When the notice is issued under Section 13(2) of SARFAESI Act, the petitioner has given his reply. In the reply, he had stated that he has been continuously paying the amount and there is no default on his part. To that the bank has given a reply clearly stating the manner in which the account is declared as NPA and what is the outstanding amount. Now, the petitioner submits that he is disputing the same. All these disputed question of facts cannot be decided by this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. As per Section 17 of the SARFAESI Act, if the borrower is aggrieved by the notice under Section 13(4) of the SARFAESI Act has a right to approach the Debt Recovery Tribunal and this Court cannot entertain this writ petition on these disputed question of facts. In that view of the matter, this Court is passing the following: - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:45073 WP No. 28055 of 2023 ORDER i. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed by giving liberty to the petitioner to avail the appropriate remedy in accordance with law. ii. The respondent/bank is at liberty to withdraw the amount that is deposited before this Court. iii. Once the amount that is deposited before this Court is withdrawn by the bank and any amount that has to be deposited by the petitioner before the Tribunal, the amount that is already deposited in the light of the interim order passed by this Court and withdrawn by the bank shall be considered by the Debt Recovery Tribunal. iv. All I.As., in the writ petition shall stand closed. SD/- (LALITHA KANNEGANTI) JUDGE BN List No.: 5 Sl No.: 5