- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:12571 WP No. 23963 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 2ND DAY OF MARCH, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM WRIT PETITION NO. 23963 OF 2025 (GM-RES) BETWEEN: 1. PAWAN KUMAR, 48 YEARS S/O RAMASHISH PRASAD NO.305, TULIP SONESTA COSMOS, 10TH MAIN, 13TH CROSS, MALLESHPALYA, BANGALORE - 560 075 2. DIPIKA MAHATA, 47 YEARS W/O PAWAN KUMAR NO. 305, TULIP SONESTA COSMOS, 10TH MAIN, 13TH CROSS, MALLESHPALYA, BANGALORE-560075 …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. ABHIJEET SHARMA, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. NATIONAL HOUSING BANK THROUGH ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR CORE 5-A, INDIA HABITAT CENTRE, LODHI ROAD, NEW DELHI - 110 003 Digitally signed by SHARADAVANI B Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:12571 WP No. 23963 of 2025 2. RESERVE BANK OF INDIA, (UNDER RBI ACT) THROUGH ITS GOVERNOR 6, SANSAD MARG, NEW DELHI - 110 001 3. UNION OF INDIA THROUGH SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF FINANCE RAJPATH MARG, E-BLOCK, CENTRAL SECRETARIAT NEW DELHI - 110 011 4. TRANS UNION CIBIL LIMITED (UNDER COMPANIES ACT 1956) FORMERLY CREDIT INFORMATION BUREAU (INDIA) LIMITED, THROUGH ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR ONE WORLD CENTRE, TOWER 2A, 19TH FLOOR, SENAPATI BAPAT MARG, ELPHINSTONE ROAD, MUMBAI - 400013 5. HDFC BANK LIMITED (INCORPORATED UNDER RBI) HDFC BANK HOUSE, SENAPATI BAPAT MARG, LOWER PAREL (WEST), MUMBAI-400013 THROUGH ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR 6. OZONE URBANA INFRA DEVELOPERS PVT LTD (UNDER COMPANIES ACT 1956) THROUGH ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR NO.38, ULSOOR ROAD BANGALORE-560042 - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:12571 WP No. 23963 of 2025 7. SATHYA MOORTHY SAI PRASAD DIRECTOR, OZONE URBANA INFRA DEVELOPERS PVT LTD NO.38, ULSOOR ROAD BANGALORE- 560042 8. VASUDEVAN SATHYAMOORTHY DIRECTOR, OZONE URBANA INFRA DEVELOPERS PVT LTD NO.38, ULSOOR ROAD BANGALORE-560042 9. KARNATAKA REAL ESTATE REGULATORY AUTHORITY THROUGH ITS CHAIRMAN SECOND FLOOR SILVER JUBILEE BLOCK 3RD CROSS ROAD, CSI COMPOUND, MISSION RD, SAMPANGI RAMA NAGARA, BENGALURU - 560027 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. B.M. KUSHALAPPA, ADVOCATE FOR R3) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO-A) ALLOW THE PRESENT PETITION, B) ISSUE APPROPRIATE ORDER OR DIRECTION TO THE RESPONDENT BANK (RESPONDENT NO.5) TO CEASE AND DESIST FROM RECOVERING EMI PAYMENTS FROM THE PETITIONERS AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:12571 WP No. 23963 of 2025 ORAL ORDER The captioned petition is filed seeking the following reliefs: a) Allow the present Petition. b) Issue an appropriate writ, order or direction directing Respondent bank/financial institutions to cease and desist from recovering Pre-EMI and EMI payments from the Petitioners against the funds disbursed by them to the Respondent Developer, until the date of possession; c) Direct the Respondent Bank/financial institutions to refund the Pre-EMIs and EMIs paid by the Petitioners to the Petitioners and recover the same from the Respondent Developer; d) Direct the Respondent Bank/financial institutions and respondent no. 4 to correct the CIBIL score of the petitioners; e) Direct the Respondent Bank/ financial institutions not to take any coercive action against the petitioners under SARFAESI Act, 2002 and NI Act, 1881; f) Issue appropriate writ, direction or order directing the RBI & NHB to inquire or appoint a committee to inquire the connivance of Respondent Bank/financial institutions with Respondent Developer in relation to disbursement of Loan amount without verifying the construction or due diligence of the Respondent Developer; g) Issue appropriate writ, direction or order directing the RBI & NHB to instruct all the banks/financial institution/ non-banking financial companies to restructure all loan accounts availed by the petitioners on its projects to protect the interest of home buyers; - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:12571 WP No. 23963 of 2025 h) Issue appropriate order or direction against Respondent bank for violating the rules and regulations laid down by the Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 as regulator for the banking sector; i) Direct the Respondent 11 to dispose the complaints filed by the petitioners within 60 days as per the provisions of the RERA Act. True copies of the RERA complaints filed by the petitioner is annexed hereto and marked as ANNEXURE-E series. j) Pass a restraining order against any person who was a Director or Managing Director of the Respondent Developer/Builder since the launching of the Project as well as the present Directors or Managing Director shall not leave the country without prior permission of this Hon'ble Court; and k) Grant any further relief that this Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case, including but not limited to, the award of costs and damages for the undue financial burden and hardship faced by the Petitioners. 2. Learned counsel appearing for the respondents has placed on record three judgments rendered by the Co- ordinate Bench of this Court in W.P.No.10325/2025, W.P.No.5459/2025 and W.P.No.23590/2025, out of which two pertain to the very same petitioner. It is contended that in the aforesaid writ petitions, identical prayers founded on the same set of allegations were sought and - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:12571 WP No. 23963 of 2025 the Co-ordinate Bench, upon examination, declined to entertain the petitions in exercise of jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. 3. Having heard the learned counsels on both sides and on perusal of the prayers extracted supra, this Court is of the considered view that each of the reliefs sought by the petitioner falls within the domain of distinct statutory or adjudicatory fora and cannot be collectively or individually adjudicated in writ jurisdiction. (a) The reliefs at clauses (b), (c) and (e), seeking directions to the respondent-Bank/financial institutions to cease recovery of Pre-EMI/EMI, to refund amounts already paid, and to restrain action under the SARFAESI Act, 2002 and the NI Act, 1881, arise out of contractual obligations flowing from loan agreements. Such disputes relating to enforcement of security interest or loan recovery are amenable to adjudication before the - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:12571 WP No. 23963 of 2025 jurisdictional Debts Recovery Tribunal under the SARFAESI Act and allied statutes. (b) The grievance at clause (d) relating to correction of CIBIL score is consequential to the loan account status and necessarily depends upon adjudication of the underlying contractual dispute by the competent forum. The writ court cannot undertake such factual adjudication. (c) The relief at clause (i), seeking a direction to the RERA Authority to dispose of complaints within a stipulated time, squarely falls within the statutory mechanism under the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016. The petitioner has already invoked the said remedy and must pursue the same before the competent Authority in accordance with law. (d) The prayers at clauses (f), (g) and (h), seeking directions against the RBI and NHB to - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:12571 WP No. 23963 of 2025 conduct inquiries, frame restructuring schemes, or initiate regulatory action against the Bank, pertain to policy and supervisory functions of statutory regulators. Such omnibus directions cannot be issued at the instance of an individual borrower in a private contractual dispute. (e) The relief at clause (j), seeking restraint against the Directors of the developer from leaving the country, is in the nature of a coercive or preventive measure, which can only be considered by a competent criminal court or appropriate forum upon satisfaction of statutory requirements, and not in a writ petition of the present nature. 4. On a careful consideration of the nature of reliefs sought, this Court is satisfied that the dispute essentially emanates from contractual arrangements between the petitioners, the developer and the financing institutions. The Co-ordinate Bench, while dealing with similar petitions - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:12571 WP No. 23963 of 2025 filed by the petitioner on the very same cause of action, has already declined to entertain such reliefs under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. This Court sees no reason to take a different view. 5. In view of the availability of efficacious alternative remedies before the respective statutory fora, no indulgence is warranted in the present writ petition. Accordingly, the writ petition stands dismissed. Sd/- (SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM) JUDGE HDK List No.: 2 Sl No.: 6