- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:49165 WP No. 31649 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 26TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE UMESH M ADIGA WRIT PETITION NO. 31649 OF 2025 (GM-DRT) BETWEEN: 1. MOHAMMED JAVID MOHAMED HUSAIN, S/O HAJI MOHAMAD HUSEN, AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS 2. HAJI MOHAMAD HUSEN, S/O HAJI ALLAVUDDIN, AGED ABOUT 75 YEARS, BOTH PETITIONERS ARE R/AT DOOR NO.592/238, 2ND MAIN, 14TH CROSS, NEAR MADARASA, RAZA UL MUSTAFA NAGAR, DAVANAGERE – 577 001 …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. NAWAZ BASHA QUADRI SYED., ADVOCATE FOR P1 & P2) AND: M/S CHOLAMANDALAM INVESTMENT & FINANCE COMPANY LTD., DARE HOUSE, 2, N.S.C. BOSE ROAD, PARRYS, CHEANNAI – 600 001, INDIA. NOW REPRESENTED BY M/S. CHOLAMANDALAM INVESTMENT & Digitally signed by MEGHA MOHAN Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:49165 WP No. 31649 of 2025 FINANCE COMPANY LTD., PRESTIGE LIBRA, 2ND FLOOR, MUNICIPAL NO.45, (OLD NO.45 & 45/1), LALBAGH ROAD, ABOVE PASSPORT OFFICE, BENGALURU – 560 027, INCORPORATED UNDER COMPANIES ACT, 1956. REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORIZED OFFICER, MR. JANARDHAN T, S/O THAMMANNA, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. SURESH V., ADVOCATE) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO A) QUASH THE IMPUGNED POSSESSION NOTICE DATED 06.10.2025 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER AND ON THE SAME THE RESPONDENT EVICTED THE PETITIONERS AND HAS TAKEN THE PHYSICAL POSSESSION OF THE SCHEDULED PROPERTY, VIDE AT ANNEXURE-B, AND CONSEQUENTLY DIRECT THE RESPONDENT FINANCE BANK TO HAND OVER /DELIVER THE PHYSICAL POSSESSION OF THE SCHEDULED PROPERTY IN FAVOUR OF THE PETITIONERS; B) GRANT SUCH OTHER RELIEF OR RELIEFS AS THIS HON’BLE COURT DEEMS FIT TO GRANT IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:49165 WP No. 31649 of 2025 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE UMESH M ADIGA ORAL ORDER Learned counsel for the petitioner and respondent are present. Learned counsel for the respondent submits that he has taken possession of the property on 06.10.2025 . 2. This writ petition is filed by the borrower wherein he has availed loan for an amount of Rs.48,00,000/- from the respondent/financial institution. Since the possession was taken prior to filing of writ petition, the petition appears to have become infructuous. 3. The prayer made in the petition is as under: i. To quash the impugned Possession Notice dated 06.10.2025 issued by the respondent to the petitioner and on the same the respondent evicted the petitioners and has taken the physical possession of the scheduled property, vide at Annexure-B and consequently direct the respondent finance bank to hand over/deliver the physical possession of the scheduled property in favour of the petitioners. ii. Grant such other relief or reliefs as this Hon’ble Court deems fit to grant in the interest of justice and equity. 4. The dispute in this case is between the borrower and the financier. The borrower has obtained loan and secured loan by creating charge on subject matter of the writ petition. He - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:49165 WP No. 31649 of 2025 has committed default in repayment of loan. Hence, the respondent initiated proceedings under Sections 13 & 14 of Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (for short ‘SARFAESI Act’). Such disputes shall be resolved as per the provisions of Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (for short ‘SARFAESI Act’). The remedy available to petitioner is to approach the DRT under Section 17 of the said Act and not before other forums. Efficacious remedy is available elsewhere is not under extraordinary jurisdiction of High Court under Articles 226 & 227 of the Constitution of India. The Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of United Bank of India vs. Satyavati Tandon reported in (2010) 8 SCC 110 held that High Court shall not interfere in the matters pertaining to the SARFAESI Act. 5. Under these circumstances, the writ petition seeking the above said relief is not maintainable. 6. For the aforesaid discussions, I proceed to pass the following: - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:49165 WP No. 31649 of 2025 ORDER i. The writ petition is disposed of. ii. Liberty is given to the petitioner to approach the Debt Recovery Tribunal seeking appropriate relief. Sd/- (UMESH M ADIGA) JUDGE TS List No.: 2 Sl No.: 11