- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:19587 WP No. 6569 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 8TH DAY OF APRIL, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM WRIT PETITION NO. 6569 OF 2026 (GM-RES) BETWEEN: ANAND RATHI GLOBAL FINANCE LIMITED A NON-BANKING FINANCE COMPANY, REGD. OFFICE AT 4TH FLOOR, SILVER METROPOLIS, JAL COACH COMPOUND, OPPOSITE TO BIMBISAR NAGAR, GOREGAON (EAST), MUMBAI, MAHARASHTRA 400063, REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE MR. MANOJ H. R. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. GURU PRASAD C REDDY., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE SECRETARY REAL ESTATE REGULATORY AUTHORITY KARNATAKA HAVING OFFICE AT 2ND FLOOR, SILVER JUBILEE BLOCK, UNITY BUILDING, CSI COMPOUND, 3RD CROSS, MISSION ROAD, BENGALURU 560027. 2. ARYAN GOLDEN ARENA BUYERS WELFARE ASSOCIATION, A WELFARE ASSOCIATION REGISTERED UNDER KARNATAKA SOCIETIES REGISTRATION ACT, 1960, HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT Digitally signed by CHAITHRA A Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:19587 WP No. 6569 of 2026 ARYAN GOLDEN ARENA, SARJAPURA-ATTIBELE ROAD, NEAR SYNDICATE BANK, SARJAPURA, BENGALURU 562125, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT TANMOY DEV 3. ARYAN GOLDEN ARENA, THE REAL ESTATE PROJECT REGISTERED UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF RERA, HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT ARYAN GOLDEN ARENA, SARJAPURA, ATTIBELE ROAD, NEAR SYNDICATE BANK, SARJAPURA, BENGALURU - 562125 4. M/S. ARYAN HOME TEC PVT LTD. A COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT, 1956, HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT 617, 15TH CROSS, 100 FT RING ROAD, J.P. NAGAR, 6TH PHASE, BENGALURU 560078, REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR S.G. BHARATH @BHARATH REDDY 5. MR. S. G. BHARATH @ BHARATH REDDY, DIRECTOR OF ARYAN HOME PVT. LTD., AGE MAJOR, RESIDING AT 68, 36TH MAIN. 19TH CROSS, J. P. NAGAR, 6TH PHASE, BENGALURU 560078 6. MS. RASHMI SURENDRAREDDY, DIRECTOR OF ARYAN HOME PVT. LTD., AGE MAJOR, RESIDING AT 68, 36TH MAIN, 19TH CROSS, J. P. NAGAR, 6TH PHASE, BENGALURU 560078 - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:19587 WP No. 6569 of 2026 7. B.G. ANJANAPPA, S/O. B.H. GUNADAREDDY, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS RESIDE AT BIDARAGUPPE VILLAGE, ATTIBELE HOBLI, ANEKAL TALUK, BENGALURU RUARAL DISTRICT, BENGALURU-562107 8. KUMARI SRI PRIYA, D/O. B.G. ANJANAPPA, AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS RESIDE AT BIDARAGUPPE VILLAGE, ATTIBELE HOBLI, ANEKAL TALUK, BENGALURU RUARAL DISTRICT, BENGALURU-562107 9. VINEETH, S/O. B.G. ANJANEPPA, AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS. RESIDE AT BIDARAGUPPE VILLAGE, ATTIBELE HOBLI, ANEKAL TALUK, BENGALURU RUARAL DISTRICT, BENGALURU-562107 10. HEMALATHA, W/O. B.G. ANJANAPPA, AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS RESIDE AT BIDARAGUPPE VILLAGE, ATTIBELE HOBLI, ANEKAL TALUK, BENGALURU RUARAL DISTRICT, BENGALURU-562107 11. B.G. KRISHNA REDDY, S/O. B.H. GUNDAREDDY, AGED ABOUT 69 YEARS RESIDE AT BIDARAGUPPE VILLAGE, ATTIBELE HOBLI, ANEKAL TALUK, BENGALURU RUARAL DISTRICT, BENGALURU-562107 - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:19587 WP No. 6569 of 2026 12. SUSHEELAMMA, W/O. B.G. KRISHNA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS RESIDE AT BIDARAGUPPE VILLAGE, ATTIBELE HOBLI, ANEKAL TALUK, BENGALURU RUARAL DISTRICT, BENGALURU-562107 13. B.K. NAGESH, S/O. B.G. KRISHNA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS RESIDE AT BIDARAGUPPE VILLAGE, ATTIBELE HOBLI, ANEKAL TALUK, BENGALURU RUARAL DISTRICT, BENGALURU-562107 14. CHANDRAKALA, W/O. B.K. NAGESH, AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS RESIDE AT BIDARAGUPPE VILLAGE, ATTIBELE HOBLI, ANEKAL TALUK, BENGALURU RUARAL DISTRICT, BENGALURU-562107 15. B.N. REESHAN REDDY, S/O. B.K. NAGESH, AGED ABOUT 12 YEARS SINCE MINOR REP. BY HIS NATURAL GUARDIAN RESPONDENT NO. 13 RESIDE AT BIDARAGUPPE VILLAGE, ATTIBELE HOBLI, ANEKAL TALUK, BENGALURU RUARAL DISTRICT, BENGALURU-562107 16. NAVEEN KUMAR, S/O. B.G. KRISHNA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS RESIDE AT BIDARAGUPPE VILLAGE, ATTIBELE HOBLI, ANEKAL TALUK, BENGALURU RUARAL DISTRICT, BENGALURU-562107 - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:19587 WP No. 6569 of 2026 17. PIRAMAL CAPITAL FINANCE LTD., HOUSING FINANCE (DHFL) A COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER COMPANIES ACT, REP. BY ITS MANAGER, OFFICE AT 13, 1 CROSS, M.B. JAYARAM ROAD, VASANTH NAGAR, KODAVASAMAJ BUILDING, BENGALURU-560052, ALSO, AT SY NO 208/1-B, 5TH FLOOR, BAJAJ FINSERV CORPORATE OFFICE, PUNE, AHMEDNAGAR ROAD, VIMANNAGAR, 411014 18. SAMMAAN CAPITAL LIMITED FORMERLY KNOWN AS INDIABULLS HOUSING FINANCE LIMITED A COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER COMPANIES ACT, REP BY ITS MANAGER, OFFICE AT 1ST FLOOR, BIKANER PINNACLE, RHENIUS STREET, RICHMOND ROAD, BENGALURU -560025. ALSO, AT PLOT 87, 6, RICHMOND ROAD, SHANTHALA NAGAR, RICHMOND TOWN, BENGALURU - 560025 19. AXIS BANK, REP BY ITS MANAGER, ADDRESS COX TOWN, 6, GROUND FLOOR, PRESTIGE LIONS GATE, MOSQUE ROAD, BENGALURU 560005 20. HOME FIRST FINANCE COMPANY LTD., A COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER COMPANIES ACT, REP BY ITS MANAGER, 35/29, 11TH MAIN, 5TH BLOCK, JAYANAGAR, OPP. TO MILAN HOSPITAL, JP NAGAR ROAD, BENGALURU 560041. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:19587 WP No. 6569 of 2026 ALSO, AT 511, ACME PLAZA, ANDHERI KURLA ROAD, ANDHERI EAST, MUMBAI 400059 21. HDFC BANK, REP BY ITS MANAGER, SATHYA SADAN, 17/1, SARJAPUR-MARATHAHALLI ROAD, BELLANDUR, BENGALURU - 560102 22. YES BANK, REP BY ITS MANAGER, BANGALORE REGIONAL OFFICE MUNICIPAL, GROUND FLOOR, 3, KASTURBA ROAD, BENGALURU-560001 ALSO, AT REGD. OFFICE AT NEHRU CENTRE, 9TH FLOOR, DISCOVERY OF INDIA, DR. A.B. ROAD, WORLI, MUMBAI 400018 23. SUNDARAM BNP PARIBAS HOME FINANCE LTD A COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER COMPANIES ACT, REP. BY ITS MANAGER, SECOND FLOOR, RAM PRABHA TOWERS, (OPP TO DHANAM STORES), 42/1 SHANTHI NAGAR, DENKANIKOTTA MAIN ROAD, HOSUR 635109 24. RELIANCE HOME FINANCE LTD., A COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER COMPANIES ACT, REP BY ITS MANAGER, 39, FFK TOWERS, 2ND FLOOR, TILAK NAGAR, BANNERGHATTA ROAD, BENGALURU 560041 - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:19587 WP No. 6569 of 2026 25. BAJAJ HOUSING FINANCE LTD., A COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER COMPANIES ACT, REP BY ITS MANAGER, PRESTIGE TOWER 506/508, RESIDENCY ROAD, BENGALURU 560025 26. PNE HOUSING FINANCE LTD., A COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER COMPANIES ACT, REP. BY ITS MANAGER, REGD. OFFICE AT 9TH FLOOR, ANTHRIKSH BHAVAN, 22 KASTURBA GANDHI MARG, NEW DELHI-110001 27. INDIA INFOLINE HOUSING FINANCE LTD., A COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER COMPANIES ACT, REP BY ITS MANAGER, 12A-10, 13TH FLOOR, PATINEE CRESCENZO, C-38 AND C39, G BLOCK, BEHIND MCA, BANDRA KURLA COMPLEX, BANDRA EAST, MUMBAL 400051 ALSO, AT SOMA MERIT, 9, GF, VENKATASWAMY NAIDU STREET, TASKAR TOWN, BENGALURU - 560051 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. D.V. SENDIL KUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR C/R3 TO R6 (CP NO.3939/2026 SRI. PRADEEP KUMAR P K , ADVOCATE FOR C/R2 CO NO.28184/2025) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO A. PASS A WRIT OF CERTIORARI AND QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 12.12.2025 PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT NO. - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:19587 WP No. 6569 of 2026 1 AUTHORITY IN COMPLAINT BEARING NO. 01242/2024 AT ANNEXURE A, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR DICTATING ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM ORAL ORDER The petitioner has presented the captioned writ petition calling in question the legality and correctness of the order dated 12.12.2025 passed by respondent No.1– Authority in Complaint No.01242/2024 vide Annexure-A. 2. The petitioner is a Non-Banking Financial Company (NBFC) engaged in the business of providing secured financial assistance, particularly to real estate developers. Respondent No.4 is a real estate developer who undertook development of a residential apartment project by name “Aryan Golden Arena.” 3. For the purpose of raising funds for development of the said project, respondent No.4 along with respondent Nos.7, 10 and 11 approached the - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:19587 WP No. 6569 of 2026 petitioner seeking financial assistance. The petitioner sanctioned a secured loan of Rs.16,00,00,000/-. In order to secure the said loan, the borrowers deposited the original title deeds relating to the schedule property and executed a registered Memorandum of Deposit of Title Deeds dated 08.02.2017. 4. According to the petitioner, the borrowers failed to adhere to the repayment schedule. Consequently, the loan account was classified as Non-Performing Asset (NPA) with effect from 01.06.2020. Following such classification, the petitioner initiated proceedings under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (for short 'SARFAESI Act'). A demand notice dated 25.09.2020 was issued calling upon the borrowers to discharge an outstanding amount of Rs.18,82,09,895.48/-. Thereafter, the petitioner issued a possession notice dated 05.01.2021 taking symbolic possession of the secured asset. - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:19587 WP No. 6569 of 2026 5. Since the borrowers failed to discharge the liability, the petitioner initiated proceedings under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act in Crl.Misc.No.52/2021. The jurisdictional Court by order dated 10.03.2022 allowed the application and permitted the petitioner to take physical possession of the secured asset. The said order was challenged before this Court in W.P.No.2564/2023. During the pendency of the said proceedings, respondent Nos.4, 5, 6 and 7 filed a joint undertaking affidavit agreeing to settle the petitioner’s dues by paying a full and final settlement amount of Rs.15,00,00,000/-. 6. Admittedly, the said undertaking was not honoured. Consequently, the petitioner initiated contempt proceedings in C.C.C.No.871/2023, which is stated to be pending adjudication before this Court. In the meanwhile, respondent Nos.4 to 7 had filed S.A.No.53/2021 before the Debt Recovery Tribunal. By order dated 29.12.2023, the Tribunal quashed the possession notice dated 04.01.2021 - 11 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:19587 WP No. 6569 of 2026 on technical grounds while reserving liberty to the petitioner to proceed afresh in accordance with law. 7. While matters stood thus, certain purchasers claiming to be members of the Aryan Golden Arena Buyers Welfare Association filed a complaint before the Authority in Complaint No.1242/2024. In the said complaint, the petitioner was arrayed as respondent No.26. 8. During the pendency of the complaint proceedings, a memo dated 11.08.2025 was filed seeking permission to take over and complete the project under Section 8 of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 (for short RERA Act). Subsequently, another memo dated 29.08.2025 was filed stating that the complainants had no objection to permitting respondent No.4 to continue the project. 9. Based on the said memo, the Authority passed the impugned order dated 12.12.2025 holding that the complaint does not survive for consideration and issued - 12 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:19587 WP No. 6569 of 2026 certain directions permitting respondent No.4 to continue the construction and directing the petitioner to co-operate with the project. Aggrieved by the said order, the petitioner is before this Court. 10. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner is merely a secured creditor and not a promoter or allottee under the RERA Act and the Authority lacks jurisdiction to issue directions affecting the enforcement of security interest. Learned counsel further contends that the SARFAESI Act is a special enactment for recovery of secured debts and has overriding effect under Section 35 and the Authority cannot compel a secured creditor to co-operate with a defaulting promoter. 11. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents contends that the RERA Act is a beneficial legislation intended to protect home buyers. Placing reliance on the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in - 13 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:19587 WP No. 6569 of 2026 Bikram Chatterji v. Union of India1 and also the judgment of the Rajasthan High Court in Union Bank of India v. Rajasthan Real Estate Regulatory Authority2, he would contend that the impugned order is appealable under Section 44 of the RERA Act, and therefore the writ petition is not maintainable. Reliance is also placed on the order of a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in W.P. No.1718/2026 directing parties to avail the statutory appellate remedy. 12. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondents. On meticulous examination, the following points would arise for consideration: (i) Whether the writ petition is maintainable in view of the statutory remedy of appeal under the RERA Act? 1 (2019) 19 SCC 161 2 2022 (1) RLW 343 - 14 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:19587 WP No. 6569 of 2026 (ii) Whether the Authority had jurisdiction to issue directions affecting a secured creditor proceeding under the SARFAESI Act? (iii) Whether the impugned order warrants interference under Article 226 of the Constitution? Finding on Point No.(i): 13. The RERA Act provides a complete statutory mechanism for adjudication of disputes. Under Section 44, any person aggrieved by an order of the Authority may prefer an appeal before the Real Estate Appellate Tribunal. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in Assistant Commissioner of State Tax v. Commercial Steel Ltd.3, has reiterated that when a Statute provides an efficacious appellate remedy, the High Court should ordinarily refrain from exercising writ jurisdiction. Similarly, in United Bank of India v. Satyawati Tondon4, the Hon'ble Apex Court has held that High Courts must exercise restraint in 3 (2021) 16 SCC 608 4 (2010) 8 SCC 110 - 15 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:19587 WP No. 6569 of 2026 entertaining writ petitions when statutory remedies are available, particularly in matters involving recovery of dues. 14. In the present case, the impugned order is one passed by the RERA Authority, and the Statute provides a specific remedy of appeal before the Appellate Tribunal. Further, a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in W.P. No.1718/2026 has also taken the view that parties aggrieved by orders of the Authority must ordinarily approach the Appellate Tribunal. Therefore, this Court is of the considered opinion that the petitioner must first avail the statutory remedy. Accordingly, Point No.(i) is answered in the negative and against the petitioner. Finding on Point No.(ii): 15. The petitioner has heavily relied on the overriding provision contained in Section 35 of the SARFAESI Act. It is well settled that the SARFAESI Act was enacted to enable secured creditors to enforce security - 16 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:19587 WP No. 6569 of 2026 interest without intervention of courts. The constitutional validity of the Act has been upheld by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Mardia Chemicals Ltd. v. Union of India5. However, the RERA Act is a subsequent welfare legislation enacted with the objective of protecting the interests of home buyers and ensuring completion of stalled real estate projects. 16. In Pioneer Urban Land and Infrastructure Ltd. v. Union of India6, the Hon’ble Supreme Court recognized the need to protect home buyers who invest their lifetime savings in real estate projects. Further, in Bikram Chatterji v. Union of India (supra), the Hon'ble Supreme Court emphasized the need to ensure completion of stalled housing projects in order to safeguard the interests of home buyers. 17. Whether the regulatory powers under RERA can operate simultaneously with the enforcement powers 5 (2204) 4 SCC 311 6 (2019) 8 SCC 416 - 17 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:19587 WP No. 6569 of 2026 under SARFAESI is a question which requires detailed examination of facts and statutory provisions. Such questions can appropriately be examined by the Appellate Tribunal, which has jurisdiction to examine both factual and legal issues. Therefore, this Court is not inclined to adjudicate the said issue in the present writ proceedings. Point No.(ii) is therefore left open for consideration by the Appellate Tribunal. Finding on Point No.(iii): 18. Having regard to the availability of a statutory appellate remedy and the nature of the dispute involved, this Court is of the considered view that the petitioner ought to be relegated to the remedy available under Section 44 of the RERA Act. CONCLUSION: 19. For the reasons stated above, this Court is not inclined to entertain the writ petition. However, liberty - 18 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:19587 WP No. 6569 of 2026 deserves to be reserved to the petitioner to avail the statutory remedy. 20. Accordingly, this Court proceeds to pass the following: ORDER (i) The writ petition is disposed of, relegating the petitioner to avail statutory remedy of appeal available under Section 44 of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016; (ii) If such an appeal is filed within four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, the Appellate Tribunal shall consider the same without raising any objection regarding limitation; (iii) All contentions of the parties are kept open; (iv) No order as to costs. Sd/- (SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM) JUDGE CA / List No.: 1 Sl No.: 101