- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:26695 WP No. 17343 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF JULY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S SUNIL DUTT YADAV WRIT PETITION NO. 17343 OF 2024 (GM-RES) BETWEEN: 1. MR SYED RUMAAN NURAIN AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS, S/O. T. M. RAHMATHULLA, 2. MR. T. M. RAHMATHULLA AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS, S/O. TONSE ABDUL KHADER, BOTH ARE R/O. AT 4-21B2, MERAAJ, VIDYARATHNA NAGAR, NISARGA COLONY, MANIPAL POST, SHIVALLI, UDUPI, KARNATAKA-576 104. … PETITIONERS (BY SRI. NAGARAJ SHETTY., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. ICICI BANK LTD., REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORIZED OFFICER/MANAGER, BRANCH SOL ID 0002, 1, SHOBHA PEARL, COMMISSARIAT ROAD, OFF MG ROAD, Digitally signed by PRAKASH N Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:26695 WP No. 17343 of 2024 GROUND FLOOR, BANGALORE-560 025. … RESPONDENT (BY SRI. FRANCIS XAVIER., ADVOCATE) THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO I) QUASH BY ISSUANCE OF WRIT IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI OR ANY OTHER WRIT THE IMPUGNED POSSESSION NOTICE DATED 14/07/2023 UNDER SECTION 8(1) OF THE SECURITIZATION AND RECONSTRUCTION OF FINANCIAL ASSETS AND ENFORCEMENT OF SECURITY INTEREST ACT, 2002 R/W 8(1) OF THE SECURITY INTEREST (ENFORCEMENT) RULES, 2002, VIDE ANNEXURE-B ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT BANK AND ETC. THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR FRESH MATTERS LIST, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S SUNIL DUTT YADAV ORAL ORDER There is no representation on behalf of the petitioners when the matter is called out. 2. This Court had passed an order on 14.07.2025 which reads as follows: "There is no representation on behalf of the petitioners. Learned counsel for the respondent - Bank submits that the direction of this Court to make further deposit of Rs.25,00,000/- before - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:26695 WP No. 17343 of 2024 06.11.2024 as per the order dated 27.09.2024 has not been complied with. As a final opportunity, list this matter on 17.07.2025 in 'fresh matters' list. It is made clear that if the petitioners do not appear on the next date of hearing, the court would be constrained to pass necessary orders." 3. It is clear that the petitioners are not diligent in prosecuting the proceedings. It is noticed that the order dated 27.09.2024 to pay further deposit of Rs.25,00,000/- has not been complied with despite lapse of several months. 4. Petitioners have challenged the validity of the possession notice dated 14.07.2023. Various contentions have been raised by the petitioners regarding the irregularity of proceedings. It is also asserted that they would clear the outstanding dues. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:26695 WP No. 17343 of 2024 5. However, learned counsel for respondent submits that petitioners have not made any payments after the order of 27.09.2024. 6. It is noticed that as against issuance of possession notice, substantive remedy is by way of proceedings under Section 17 of the SARFAESI Act. 7. Accordingly, petitioners are at liberty to assail the validity of the possession notice in the proceedings under Section 17 of the SARFAESI Act. Respondent - Bank not to take any precipitative steps for a period of 3 weeks from today. 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. 8. In light of the above, the petition is disposed off. Sd/- (S SUNIL DUTT YADAV) JUDGE VP