- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:53317 WP No. 25833 of 2025 C/W WP No. 8224 of 2023 WP No. 13365 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI WRIT PETITION NO.25833/2025 (GM-DRT) C/W WRIT PETITION NO.8224/2023 (GM-DRT) AND WRIT PETITION NO.13365/2023 (GM-DRT) IN WP NO.25833/2025 BETWEEN: 1. M/S. P G SETTY CONSTRUCTIONS PVT. LTD., A COMPANY REGISTERED UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF THE COMPANIES ACT AND ALSO REGISTERED AS MSME UNDER THE MSME ACT OFFICE AT NO.74, SANDESH ARCADE 3RD FLOOR, SAUKAR CHANNAIAH ROAD KUVEMPU NAGAR MYSURU - 570 023 REP. BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR. 2. M/S. P.G. SETTY HABITAT SYSTEM INDIA PVT. LTD., A COMPANY REGISTERED UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF THE COMPANIES ACT OFFICE AT:NO.1056, KAVITHA VILAS M.G.ROAD, CHAMARAJAPURAM MYSURU- 570 005 REP. BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR. 3. SRI. M.G. SOMASHEKAR S/O P. GOPALA SETTY AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS R/AT NO.57, 9TH MAIN 'F' BLOCK, J.P NAGAR MYSURU - 570 008. Digitally signed by SUVARNA T Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:53317 WP No. 25833 of 2025 C/W WP No. 8224 of 2023 WP No. 13365 of 2023 4. SMT. SANDHYA RANI N K W/O M.G. SOMASHEKAR AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS R/AT NO. 57, 9TH MAIN 'F' BLOCK, J.P NAGAR MYSURU - 570 008. 5. SMT. BHAVYA SETTY D/O M.G. SOMASHEKAR AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS R/AT NO.57, 9TH MAIN 'F' BLOCK, J.P NAGAR MYSURU -570 008. 6. SMT. M.G. ASHA W/O S. DIWAKAR AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS R/AT NO.12, 5TH BLOCK SHIVASHAKTHI ROAD SHAKTHI NAGAR MYSURU- 570008. 7. SMT. M.G. MEENA W/O H.V. VISHWANATH AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS R/AT NO.265, SWARNADRI 1ST MAIN 3RD CROSS, VIDYATH NAGAR HASSAN- 571 203. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. D.R. RAVISHANKAR, SR. COUNSEL FOR SRI GIRISH KUMAR B.M., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. CANARA BANK ARM-II BRANCH AT: 2ND FLOOR, CIRCLE OFFICE, NO.86, SPENCER TOWERS, M.G. ROAD, BENGALURU-560001 REP. BY ITS CHIEF MANAGER. 2. THE SENIOR MANAGER CANARA BANK, - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:53317 WP No. 25833 of 2025 C/W WP No. 8224 of 2023 WP No. 13365 of 2023 NO.442, 6TH MAIN VIJAYANAGAR I STAGE, MYSURU - 570017. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. VINAY SWAMY C., ADVOCATE) THIS PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO (A) DECLARE THAT THE CLASSIFICATION OF THE LOAN ACCOUNTS OF THE PETITIONERS AS NPA AS BAD, ILLEGAL AND CONTRARY TO LAW; (B) DECLARE THAT THE PETITIONERS ARE ENTITLED TO THE BENEFITS UNDER THE INSTRUCTIONS FOR FRAMEWORK FOR REVIVAL AND REHABILITATION OF MSMES ISSUED VIDE THE NOTIFICATION DATED 29TH MAY, 2015 BY THE MINISTRY FOR MSME, GOVERNMENT OF INDIA VIDE ANNEXURE-W AND ETC. IN WP NO.8224/2023 BETWEEN: 1. M/S. P G SETTY CONSTRUCTION TECHNOLOGY PVT. LTD., NO.74 SANDESH ARCADE, SAUKAR CHENNAIAH ROAD 17TH MAIN, KUVEMPUNAGAR NORTH, SARASWATHIPURAM MYSORE -570009 REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORISED SIGHNATORY M G SOMASHEKAR. 2. SRI M G SOMASHEKAR S/O LATE P GOPAL SHETTY, AGE 59 YEARS, 3. SMT. SANDHYA RANI W/O SRI M G SOMASHEKAR AGE 58 YEARS, 4. MS. BHAVYA SHETTY D/O M G SOMASHEKAR - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:53317 WP No. 25833 of 2025 C/W WP No. 8224 of 2023 WP No. 13365 of 2023 AGE 35 YEARS, PETITIONERS NO.2 TO 4 ARE R/AT NO.57, 9TH MAIN, F BLOCK, J P NAGAR MYSURU-570008. ...PETITIONERS (BY SRI. GOWRISHANKAR S., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. CANARA BANK MID CORPORATE BRANCH, MYSORE, NO.442, 6TH MAIN VIJAYANAGAR 1ST STAGE MYSURU-570017 REP. BY AUTHORISED OFFICER. 2. MS. BHAVYA SHETTY D/O M G SOMASHEKAR AGE 35 YEARS, NO.57, 9TH MAIN, F BLOCK J P NAGAR MYSURU- 570008. 3. SMT. ASHA W/O DIWAKAR, AGE 55 YEARS, NO 12, 5TH BLOCK SHIVASHAKTHI ROAD, SHAKTHI NAGAR, MYSORE-570008. 4. SMT. MEENA W/O H V VISHWANATH, AGE 53 YEARS NO.265, SWARNADRI 1ST MAIN 3RD CROSS, VIDYUTH NAGAR HASSAN-571203. ...RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. VIGNESH SHETTY, ADVOCATE FOR R1 R3 IS SERVED) - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:53317 WP No. 25833 of 2025 C/W WP No. 8224 of 2023 WP No. 13365 of 2023 THIS PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECTING THE RESPONDENT BANK TO RESTRUCTURE THE LOAN ACCOUNT VIDE REF PGS/A AND F/22-23/956 DATED 5.12.2022 AS PER ANNEXURE-J AND QUASH THE POSSESSION NOTICE DATED 08.03.2023 PUBLISHED IN KANNADA PRABHA AS PER ANNEXURE-N. IN WP NO.13365/2023 BETWEEN: 1. M/S. P G SETTY CONSTRUCTION TECHNOLOGY PVT. LTD., (CERTIFICATE OF IN CORPORATION) NO.74, SANDESH ARCADE, SAUKAR CHENNAIAH ROAD, 17TH MAIN, KUVEMPUNAGAR NORTH, SARASWATHIPURAM MYSORE - 570009 REP. BY ITS AUTHORISED SIGNATORY/ MANAGING DIRECTOR M.G. SOMASHEKAR S/O LATE P. GOPAL SHETTY AGED 59 YEARS. 2. SRI. M G SOMASHEKAR S/O LATE P. GOPAL SHETTY AGED 59 YEARS R/AT NO.57, 9TH MAIN F BLOCK, J P NAGAR MYSURU – 570008. ...PETITIONERS (BY SRI. R CHANNAKESHAVA, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. CANARA BANK MID CORPORATE BRANCH, MYSORE, NO.442, 6TH MAIN, VIJAYANAGAR, 1ST STAGE, - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:53317 WP No. 25833 of 2025 C/W WP No. 8224 of 2023 WP No. 13365 of 2023 MYSURU - 570017 REP. BY AUTHORISED OFFICER/ SR. MANAGER 2. SMT. SANDHYA RANI W/O SRI. M G SOMASHEKAR AGED 58 YEARS 3. MS. BHAVYA SHETTY D/O M G SOMASHEKAR AGED 35 YEARS ALL ARE R/AT NO.57, 9TH MAIN F BLOCK J P NAGAR MYSURU – 570008. 4. SMT. ASHA W/O DIWAKAR AGE 55 YEARS NO.12, 5TH BLOCK SHIVASHAKTHI ROAD SHAKTHI NAGAR MYSORE-570008. 5. SMT. MEENA W/O H V VISHWANATH AGED 53 YEARS NO.265, SWARNADRI 1ST MAIN 3RD CROSS, VIDYUTH NAGAR HASSAN – 571203. 6. P.G. SETTEE HABITAT SYSTEM PVT. LTD., O/AT NO.74, SANDESH ARCADE SAUKAR CHENNAIAH ROAD 17TH MAIN, KUVEMPUNAGAR NORTH SARASWATHIPURAM MYSURU – 570009 REP. BY ITS AUTHORISED SIGNATORY MANAGING DIRECTOR. ...RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. VIGNESH SHETTY, ADVOCATE FOR R1 R4 AND R6 ARE SERVED) - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:53317 WP No. 25833 of 2025 C/W WP No. 8224 of 2023 WP No. 13365 of 2023 THIS PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 22/06/2023 PASSED BY I ADDL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, MYSURU IN C.MISC NO. 192/2023 AT ANNEXURE-P AND TO AWARD THE COSTS OF THIS PETITION. THESE PETITIONS, COMING ON FOR HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI ORAL ORDER The writ petitioner has filed three writ petitions i.e., WP.Nos.8224/2023, 25833/2025 and 13365/2023. All these writ petitions are by the same petitioner against same respondent, this court is disposing the three writ petitions by way of common orders. 2. WP.No.8224/2023 is filed seeking the following relief: “WHEREFORE, the Petitioner pray that this Hon'ble Court be pleased to: i. Issue a writ of Mandamus directing the Respondent Bank to Restructure the loan account vide Ref:PGS/A&F/22-23/956 dated 5.12.22 as per ANNEXURE-J. ii. Issue a writ of Certiorari i.e., to Quash the Possession Notice dated 8.3.2023 Published in Kannada Prabha as per ANNEXURE-N. iii. To award the costs of this Petition; and iv. To pass such other order or orders, as this Hon'ble court deems fit to grant in the circumstances of the case in the interest of justice and equity.” - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:53317 WP No. 25833 of 2025 C/W WP No. 8224 of 2023 WP No. 13365 of 2023 3. WP.No.13365/2023 is filed seeking the following prayer: “WHEREFORE, the Petitioner pray that this Hon’ble court be pleased to i). Issue a writ of Certiorari i.e., to Quash the orders dated 22.6.2023 passed by I Additional Senior Civil Judge and Chief Judicial Magistrate, Mysuru in C.Misc No.192/2023 at Annexure-P. ii) To award the costs of this Petition; and iii) To pass such other order or orders, as this Hon'ble court deems fit to grant in the circumstances of the case in the interest of justice and equity.” 4. WP.No.25833/2025 is filed seeking the following prayer: “WHEREFORE, the Petitioners most humbly and respectfully prays that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to: (a) Declare that the classification of the loan accounts of the Petitioners as NPA as bad, illegal and contrary to law; (b) Declare that the Petitioners are entitled to the benefits under the Instructions for Framework for Revival and Rehabilitation of MSMEs issued vide the Notification dated 29th May, 2015 by the Ministry for MSME, Government of India vide Annexure - W; (c) Issue a Writ in the nature of Certiorari or any other Writ setting aside the Order dated 22.07.2025 passed in Crl.Misc No. 87/2025 passed by the Senior Civil Judge & CJM, Kodagu, at Madikeri vide Annexure - A; (d) Issue a Writ in the nature of Certiorari or any other Writ quashing the Demand Notice dated 12.12.2022 bearing No.4966/MCB/PGS/ DN/2022-23 vide Annexure - B and Possession Notice dated 08.03.2023 bearing No. 4966/MCB/PGS/PN/2022-23 issued by the Respondents vide Annexure C as bad, arbitrary and contrary to law; - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:53317 WP No. 25833 of 2025 C/W WP No. 8224 of 2023 WP No. 13365 of 2023 (e) Consequently, direct the Respondents to withdraw all actions/decisions taken pursuant to the passing of the Order at Annexure - A, B and C; (f) Pass such other order as this Hon'ble Court deems fit to grant, in the facts and circumstances of the case.” 5. WP.No.8224/2023 is filed by the petitioners seeking a direction to the respondent/Bank to restructure the loan account and to quash the Possession Notice dated 08.03.2023. In the said writ petition, petitioner No.1 is a company established under the Companies Act. The company is engaged in the business of construction and is associated with respondent No.1/Bank for over a period of 50 years routing all their transactions through the accounts maintained at respondent No.1/Bank. Petitioner No.1 is a company doing the business since 50 years and more than 100 employees are depending directly on the company for their livelihood and more than 200 members are indirectly dependent on the business of petitioner No.1 for their livelihood. It is stated that petitioner No.1 during the course of their business had availed the credit facilities from respondent No.1/Bank to an extent of Rs.31,41,00,000/- including Rs.8,00,00,000/- as Bank guarantee limit from respondent No.1/Bank and now they are - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:53317 WP No. 25833 of 2025 C/W WP No. 8224 of 2023 WP No. 13365 of 2023 due to the extent of Rs.27,52,67,725/-. Petitioner No.1 have utilized to the extent of Rs.6,28,87,560/- from the Bank Guarantee and an amount of Rs.1,30,15,391.62/- and Rs.2,62,80,254.00/- from the Government Emergency Credit Line. 6. It is stated that they were punctual in servicing the loan accounts and their commitment towards repayment of outstanding dues to the Bank up to the year 2021 which is evident from the fact that petitioner No.1 company during the course of past 10 years has paid about Rs.21 crores by way of interest and other charges towards the loan facilities. It is stated that they are in constant touch with respondent No.1/ Bank for restructuring the loan account from the beginning of 2022. They are paying the installment amounts with great difficulties. On 19.05.2022, they approached respondent No.1 for enhancement of Overdraft facility to the extent of Rs.3.5 crores, but respondent No.1 has not enhanced the Overdraft facility and also reduced the Bank guarantee from Rs.15 crores to Rs.8 crores. - 11 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:53317 WP No. 25833 of 2025 C/W WP No. 8224 of 2023 WP No. 13365 of 2023 7. Again on 05.12.2022, they approached the Bank for restructuring the loan account. The petitioners have instituted four suits for recovery of the final dues for the projects undertaken from the State Government to the tune of Rs.19.08 crores and they are pending for adjudication before several courts. It is stated that the Bank without giving an opportunity of restructuring the loan have taken the drastic steps for recovery and classified the loan account as non performing assets and issued Demand Notice. In support of the grounds, it is stated that the act of respondent No.1/Bank is in violation of the principles of natural justice. It is stated that respondent No.1/ Bank has violated the statutory provisions, as per the law declared by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the Judgment reported in 2007 AIR SCW 1533. It is stated that they are ready to compromise the case and ready to restructure the loan account as per the guidelines of the RBI. 8. In this case, no interim order is passed. In WP.No.13365/2023, the relief sought by the petitioner is to quash the order dated 22.06.2023 passed by the I Additional Senior Civil Judge and Chief Judicial Magistrate, Mysore in C.Misc.No.192/2003. Under Section 14 of the Securitisation and - 12 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:53317 WP No. 25833 of 2025 C/W WP No. 8224 of 2023 WP No. 13365 of 2023 Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (hereinafter referred to as ‘SARFAESI Act’). In this writ petition also, the petitioners has stated the same facts and raised the same grounds as raised in WP.No.8224/2023 which is referred in the preceeding paragraphs. 9. In this case, an interim order was passed by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court on 28.06.2023 which reads thus: "Issue Emergent Notice. Stay of impugned order till next date of hearing, subject to petitioners depositing with the respondent-Bank, a sum of Rs.9,00,00,000/- (Rupees Nine Crore) only, as under: (i) Rs.3,00,00,000/- (Rupees Three Crore) only, within two weeks, (ii) Rs.3,00,00,000/- (Rupees Three Crore) only, within next two weeks, (iii) Rs.3,00,00,000/- (Rupees Three Crore) only, in the two weeks next following, failing which not only the interim order stands rescinded on its own but it will cast its shadow on the merits of the main matter too." 10. The petitioner has not complied with the interim order dated 28.06.2023. Thereafter, the petitioners had filed WP.No.25833/2025. In this writ petition, the petitioner for the - 13 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:53317 WP No. 25833 of 2025 C/W WP No. 8224 of 2023 WP No. 13365 of 2023 first time has raised the ground that the petitioner is an MSME and the Bank has failed to follow the procedure while declaring the account as NPA and it is contrary to several judgments of the Hon'ble Apex Court and the same needs to be set aside. In this case, the relief that is sought is to declare that the classification of the loan accounts of the petitioners as NPA as bad, illegal and contrary to law, to declare that the petitioners are entitled to the benefits under the Instructions for Framework for Revival and Rehabilitation of MSMEs issued vide the Notification dated 29th May 2015, to set aside the order dated 22.07.2025 passed in Crl.Misc.No.87/2025 passed by the Senior Civil Judge & CJM, Kodagu, at Madikeri and to quash the Demand Notice dated 12.12.2022. Consequently, direct the respondents to withdraw all actions/decisions taken pursuant to the passing of the order. 11. In this writ petition, the petitioners have stated that the Bank has declared the account of the petitioner No.1 as NPA on 29.11.2022. It is stated that in order to overcome its obligations to realign and restructure the accounts in order to revive MSME, appears to have issued Demand Notice on 12.12.2022 under Section 13(2) of the SARFAESI Act stating - 14 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:53317 WP No. 25833 of 2025 C/W WP No. 8224 of 2023 WP No. 13365 of 2023 that allegedly the accounts were classified as NPA on 29.11.2022. This shows the highhandedness of the Bank. All the proceedings that are initiated under the SARFAESI Act are contrary to the guidelines issued by the RBI and the law laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court from time to time. 12. It is further stated that, petitioner No.1 is an MSME and the respondent/Bank could not have classified the loan accounts of petitioner No.1 as NPA. It is stated that the Bank has filed O.A.No.1222/2023 before the DRT-II, Bangalore against the petitioners which is pending consideration. Further, in relation to one of the sale notices issued by the respondent/Bank, the petitioners have filed S.A.No.253/2025, wherein the confirmation of the sale is stayed by the DRT, subject to the remittance of an amount of Rs.2 crores with the respondent. It is stated that the petitioner had filed WP.No.13365/2023 challenging the order passed in Crl.Misc.No.192/2023 which is pending consideration before this Court and in the said petition, a conditional order of stay was passed which has automatically been rescinded as petitioner No.1 could not pay the money as it is in severe financial constraints, its accounts were blocked and the source - 15 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:53317 WP No. 25833 of 2025 C/W WP No. 8224 of 2023 WP No. 13365 of 2023 of financial income was curtailed. It is stated that the Bank has issued Sale Notice dated 27.05.2025, 03.06.2025, 25.06.2025 and 24.07.2025. It is stated that the petitioner gave a representation on 13.08.2025 expressing its intentions to settle the claim through OTS and it was brought to the notice of the Bank about non-compliance of the Notification dated 29.05.2015 and to reconsider its action. It is the case of the petitioners that the entire proceedings that are initiated under the SARFAESI Act are bad. 13. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners has argued in line with the pleadings that are discussed in the preceding paragraphs and has drawn the attention of this Court to the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in case of M/s. Pro Knits Vs. The Board Of Directors Of Canara Bank & Others1 and submits that following the framework is mandatory and the Bank ought to have followed the proceedings before classifying the account of MSME as the petitioner NPA. It is submitted that in the present case, the respondent No.1/Bank has not exercised and followed the framework as mandated. Hence, the entire action of the 1 (2024) 10 SCC 292 - 16 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:53317 WP No. 25833 of 2025 C/W WP No. 8224 of 2023 WP No. 13365 of 2023 respondent/Bank in initiating the proceedings under the SARFAESI Act is arbitrary and illegal. The Magistrate without even verifying the documents produced by the respondent/Bank and without assigning any reasons has mechanically allowed the petition filed by the Bank and hence, the proceedings under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act have to be set aside. It is argued that the respondent/Bank has infracted the canons of natural justice besides circumventing the guidelines and directives of the RBI under law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court. 14. The respondent No.1/Bank has filed its objections. In the objections, it is stated that earlier, the petitioners had filed SA.No.253/2025 challenging the Sale Notice dated 24.07.2025 before DRT II Bangalore. The DRT had granted interim order of stay on confirmation of sale till 28.08.2025 on condition of deposition of the amount. They came to know that one of the scheduled properties is successfully sold, without complying with the interim order passed in SA.No.253/2025. There after petitioners have come before this Court and filed this instant writ petition and obtained stay of all further proceedings. In the SA that is filed before the DRT, they have raised all the grounds - 17 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:53317 WP No. 25833 of 2025 C/W WP No. 8224 of 2023 WP No. 13365 of 2023 of MSME. It is stated that the petitioners are approaching, different forums, by filing different writ petitions and seeking interim orders and after the interim orders are granted, they are not complying with the same. It is submitted that both in SA.No.253/2025 as well as in WP.No.13365/2023. Interim order is passed directing to pay an amount of Rs.9 crores, without complying with the said orders, they are filing the writ petitions one after the other. It is submitted that it is a pure abuse of process of law. It is also stated that the petitioner's account was declared as NPA on 12.12.2022. Immediately after that they have filed WP.No.8224/2023 seeking for restructuring of their account. The respondent/Bank has entered appearance and filed their objections with proof that the accounts of the petitioners were restructured on 26.06.2021. 15. Thereafter, WP.No.13365/2023 was filed on 24.06.2023 challenging Section 14 order and that interim order is also not complied with. Further, it is stated that they have not raised the plea of it being MSME and its entitlement to the benefits of MSME in any of their earlier writ petitions or the letters to the Bank though they have registered themselves as MSME in 2021. It is stated that it is the duty of the MSME to - 18 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:53317 WP No. 25833 of 2025 C/W WP No. 8224 of 2023 WP No. 13365 of 2023 approach the Bank with verifiable documents along with affidavits by authorized official of the MSME to avail the benefit of the same. It is stated that the Hon’ble Apex Court in Celir LLP Vs. Sumathi Prasad and in Sanjay Sharma Vs. Kotak Mahindra has clearly held that once the sale takes place, it cannot be set aside or stalled unnecessarily without any material irregularities. Though the petitioners have filed three writ petitions, they have failed to point out any irregularities in the recovery proceedings. It is further submitted that when Notice under Section 13(2) of the SARFAESI Act is issued, the petitioners have never replied to the same. 16. Learned counsel appearing for respondent No.1/Bank had reiterated the stand that is taken in the objections. Relying on the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in United Bank of India Vs. Satyawati Tondon & ors2 and Celir LLP VS. Bafna Motors (Mumbai) Pvt Ltd & ors3 submits that when the petition has an efficacious alternative remedy, when they have already availed the said remedy, they cannot come before this Court by filing the writ petition. As already a Sale Notice was challenged before the DRT and has obtained an interim 2 (2010) 8 SCC 110 3 (2024) 2 SCC 1 - 19 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:53317 WP No. 25833 of 2025 C/W WP No. 8224 of 2023 WP No. 13365 of 2023 order, having raised all these issues, it is not open for the petitioners to come before this Court. It is submitted that it is nothing but forum shopping and pure abuse of process of law. The outstanding amount is running into crores of Rupees. 17. In response to the argument of the learned counsel for respondent No.1/Bank, learned Senior counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that question of bringing to the notice of the Bank about the MSME is not required and in fact it is registered as an MSME in the year 2021 itself. Hence, this ground is not available to the Bank. 18. Having heard the learned Senior counsel for the petitioners and the learned counsel appearing for respondent No.1/Bank, perused the entire material on record. The petitioner's account is declared as NPA way back in the year 2022. Thereafter, he has filed two writ petitions before this Court i.e., WP.No.13365/2023 and WP.No.8224/2023. In both the writ petitions, petitioners have only stated about the financial difficulties that are faced by the petitioners and what are the repercussions of these proceedings that are initiated by the Bank against the petitioners. Except that, he has not taken - 20 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:53317 WP No. 25833 of 2025 C/W WP No. 8224 of 2023 WP No. 13365 of 2023 any other ground. In fact, when the Notice under Section 13(2) of the SARFAESI Act was issued to the petitioners, the petitioners have not issued reply to the same and in the earlier rounds of litigation, they have not raised the plea of MSME and they kept quiet. When a Sale Notice was issued, he went before the DRT and obtained an interim order and that order was not complied with. Even in WP.No.13365/2023, an interim order was granted which was not complied with. Then WP.No.25833/2025 is filed and in that also interim order was passed. In the writ petitions, very cleverly, the petitioners have stated about filing of the SA before the DRT but they never stated about the interim order that is granted by the DRT and about the ground of MSME that is raised before the DRT. The conduct of the petitioners right from the first writ petition to the subsequent petitions appears to be that the petitioners wants to drag on the proceedings on one ground or the other. 19. Even assuming that there is an illegality in the proceedings initiated by the Bank, still all these grounds can be raised before the DRT which the petitioners have already done by filing the SA where the Sale Notice was questioned. After filing that, why they have again come before this Court by filing - 21 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:53317 WP No. 25833 of 2025 C/W WP No. 8224 of 2023 WP No. 13365 of 2023 this writ petition is not known. The Hon'ble Apex Court has time and again laid down the law with regard to the scope of interference by this Court in the proceedings initiated under the SARFAESI Act. The Hon'ble Apex Court in case of Phr Invent Educational Society Vs. Uco Bank and Others4 arising out of SLP(C) No.8867/2022 dated 10.04.2024 had categorically observed about the power of the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution in SARFAESI proceedings. Paragraph No.29 of the order reads as follows: “29. It could thus clearly be seen that the Court has carved out certain exceptions when a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution could be entertained in spite of availability of an alternative remedy. Some of them are thus: (i) where the statutory authority has not acted in accordance with the provisions of the enactment in question; (ii) it has acted in defiance of the fundamental principles of judicial procedure; (iii) it has resorted to invoke the provisions which are repealed; and (iv) when an order has been passed in total violation of the principles of natural justice.” 20. In the light of the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court and considering the conduct of the petitioners who is approaching different forums by filing different petitions, this is 4 2024 INSC 297 - 22 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:53317 WP No. 25833 of 2025 C/W WP No. 8224 of 2023 WP No. 13365 of 2023 not a case where this Court has to exercise the jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The petitioners having already approached the DRT is at liberty to prosecute the pending SA. In the light of the settled law, this Court cannot entertain these writ petitions. Hence, this Court deems it appropriate to pass the following: ORDER i. Accordingly, WP.Nos.8224/2023, 13365/2023 and 25833/2025 are dismissed. ii. All I.As if any, in these petitions shall stand closed. SD/- (LALITHA KANNEGANTI) JUDGE MEG CT:bms List No.: 1 Sl No.: 65