- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:22496-DB COMAP No. 128 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF APRIL, 2026 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA COMMERCIAL APPEAL NO. 128 OF 2026 BETWEEN: 1. SAMMAAN FINSERVE LIMITED (FORMERLY KNOWN AS INDIABULLS COMMERCIAL CREDIT LIMITED) A COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT, 1956 WITH REGISTERED ADDRESS AT: 2ND FLOOR PLOT NO-3 BLOCK-A POCKET-2, SECTOR-17 DWARKA RESIDENTIAL SCHEME DISTRICT COURT COMPLEX DWARKA SOUTH WEST DELHI - 110 075 REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE MR. ABDUL JAMEEL R.V. 2. SAMMAAN CAPITAL LIMITED (FORMERLY KNOWN AS INDIABULLS HOUSING FINANCE LIMITED) A COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT, 1956 WITH REGISTERED ADDRESS AT: A-34, 2ND AND 3RD FLOOR LAJPAT NAGAR-II SOUTH DELHI - 110 024 Digitally signed by SRIDEVI S Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:22496-DB COMAP No. 128 of 2026 AND HAVING ONE OF THE BRANCH OFFICES AT: PLOT NO. 87/6, GROUND MEZZANINE INDIABULLS HOUSE, RICHMOND TOWN BANGALORE - 560 025 REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE MR. DAMODAR S 3. OMKARA ASSETS RECONSTRUCTION PRIVATE LIMITED A COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT, 1956 HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT: NO.9, M.P. NAGAR, FIRST STREET KONGU NAGAR EXTENSION TIRUPUR - 641 607, TAMIL NADU AND CORPORATE OFFICE AT: KOHINOOR SQUARE, 47TH FLOOR N.C. KELKAR MARG R.G. GADKARI CHOWK DADAR (WEST) MUMBAI MAHARASHTRA - 400 028 REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORISED SIGNATORY RAJENDRA BHOSALE …APPELLANTS (BY SRI DHYAN CHINNAPPA, SENIOR ADVOCATE FOR SRI CHINTAN CHINNAPPA M., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. MR. CHIMANLAL TALREJA AGED ABOUT 78 YEARS SON OF LATE SHRI LALCHAND TALREJA RESIDING AT: 45, NANJAPPA ROAD - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:22496-DB COMAP No. 128 of 2026 SHANTI NAGAR BENGALURU - 560 027 2. PROPCARE DEVELOPERS PRIVATE LIMITED (FORMERLY KNOWN AS MANTRI DEVELOPERS PRIVATE LIMITED) WITH REGISTERED ADDRESS AT C-5, RICH HOMES, No.5/1 RICHMOND ROAD RICHMOND TOWN BENGALURU - 560 025 REPRESENTED BY DIRECTORS MR. MOHANKUMAR SINGAPURA JAYANNA AND MR. METHUKU SRINIVAS 3. MR. B.S.N. HARI AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS SON OF LATE SHRI. B.N. SATYANNA RESIDING AT NO. 473, 9TH CROSS 1ST BLOCK, JAYANAGAR BENGALURU - 560011 WITH ADDRESS ALSO AT: NO.1, GUTTE ANJANEYA TEMPLE STREET HOSUR ROAD WILSON GARDEN BENGALURU - 560 027 4. MR. JAVED HAROON AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS SON OF LATE SHRI SYED ALI RESIDING AT NO. 20, 30TH CROSS BANNERGHATTA ROAD LAYOUT JAYANAGAR BENGALURU - 560 041 - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:22496-DB COMAP No. 128 of 2026 5. MR. NASEER HUMAYUN AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS SON OF LATE SHRI. SYED ALI RESIDING AT: NO. 82 AND 83, FERNA RESIDENCY K NARAYANAPURA CROSS ROAD KOTHANUR BENGALURU - 560 077 6. NAVA KARNATAKA PROPERTY HOLDINGS PRIVATE LIMITED WITH REGISTERED ADDRESS AT: NO. 232/C, GROUND FLOOR 2ND MAIN, 7TH CROSS KORAMANGALA 4TH BLOCK BENGALURU - 560 034 REPRESENTED BY DIRECTOR MR. HULIMANGALA VIJAYARAGHAVAREDDY 7. MR. K LOKESH AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS SON OF LATE SHRI. KRISHNAPPA RESIDING AT: NO. 69, NAGARESHWARA NAGENAHALLI K NARAYANAPURA MAIN ROAD SRK NAGAR POST BENGALURU - 560 077 8. SMT. K NANDINI AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS WIFE OF MR. K LOKESH RESIDING AT: NO. 69, NAGARESHWARA NAGENAHALLI K. NARAYANAPURA MAIN ROAD SRK NAGAR POST BENGALURU - 560 077 - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:22496-DB COMAP No. 128 of 2026 9. MR. K. MANJUNATH AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS SON OF LATE SHRI. KRISHNAPPA RESIDING AT NO. 69, NAGARESHWARA NAGENAHALLI K NARAYANAPURA MAIN ROAD SRK NAGAR POST BENGALURU - 560 077 10. MR. S SOMASHEKHAR AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS SON OF LATE SHRI SONNAPPA RESIDING AT NO. 188 HOMBALE NILAYA OPPOSITE DINANILAYA CONVENT KOTHANUR BENGALURU - 560 077 11. SMT. PAOLA RAVISHANKAR AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS WIFE OF MR. D. RAVISHANKAR RESIDING AT: L-3, LIC HOUSING SCHEME JP NAGAR, 1ST PHASE BENGALURU - 560 078 WITH ADDRESS ALSO AT: NO.1, GUTTE ANJANEYA TEMPLE STREET HOSUR MAIN ROAD WILSON GARDEN BANGALORE - 560 027 12. SMT. ALMITRA H. PATEL AGED ABOUT 88 YEARS WIFE OF SHRI HOSHANG COOVERJI PATEL RESIDING AT: - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:22496-DB COMAP No. 128 of 2026 NO.50, KOTHANUR BAGALUR ROAD K.R. PURAM BANGALORE - 560 077 13. SMT. LOUISA RODRIGUES AGED ABOUT 94 YEARS WIFE OF LATE SHRI MANUAL RODRIGUES RESIDING AT NO. 283 "AMMA", 7TH CROSS 7TH BLOCK, JAYANAGAR BENGALURU - 560 011 WITH ADDRESS ALSO AT: NO.1, HARA HOUSE GUTTE ANJANEYA TEMPLE STREET HOSUR MAIN ROAD, WILSON GARDEN BENGALURU - 560 027 14. MR. D. RAVISHANKAR AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS SON OF LATE SHRI. D. KAMESH RESIDING AT: NO. L-3, LIC HOUSING SCHEME J.P. NAGAR, 1 PHASE BENGALURU - 560 078 WITH ADDRESS ALSO AT: NO.1, GUTTE ANJANEYA TEMPLE STREET HOSUR MAIN ROAD WILSON GARDEN BENGALURU - 560 027 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI ASHIWIN RADHKRISHNAN, ADVOCATE FOR C/R-1; R-2 IS SERVED & UNREPRSENTED & VIDE ORDER DATED 18.03.2026, NOTICE TO R-3 TO 14 IS DISPENSED WITH) - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:22496-DB COMAP No. 128 of 2026 THIS COMMERCIAL APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 13 (1- A) OF THE COMMERCIAL COURT ACT, 2015 READ WITH SECTION 37(1)(b) OF THE ARBITRATION AND CONCILIATION ACT, 1996 PRAYING TO ALLOW THIS COMMERCIAL APPEAL AND SET ASIDE THE FINAL ORDER DATED 10.02.2026, PASSED BY THE HON'BLE XI ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT, BENGALURU, COMMERCIAL COURT (CCH-11) IN COMMERCIAL A.A. NO. 21/2025 (ANNEXURE-A) AND CONSEQUENTLY DISMISS THE APPLICATION IN COMMERCIAL A.A. NO. 21/2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE XI ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT, BENGALURU, COMMERCIAL COURT (CCH 11), AS AGAINST THE APPELLANTS & ETC. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE and HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE) 1. The appellants have filed the present appeal under Section 37(1)(b) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 [A&C Act] impugning an order dated 10.02.2026 passed by the XI Additional District and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru Rural District, Bengaluru, Commercial Court (CCH-11) [Commercial Court] in - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:22496-DB COMAP No. 128 of 2026 Com.A.A.No.21/2025. The said application was filed by respondent No.1 under Section 9 of the A&C Act, inter alia, seeking interim measures of protection, restraining the appellants from initiating any proceedings under the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 [SARFAESI Act] or any other law. Appellant Nos. 1 and 2 are Non-Banking Financial Companies, and appellant No.3 is an Asset Reconstruction Company. They have filed the present appeal confined to the directions issued in the impugned order to the extent that it restrains them from initiating any proceedings under Section 13 of the SARFAESI Act or any other law, till the petition under Section 11 of the A&C Act, CMP.No.589/2025, which is pending before this Court. 2. The learned Commercial Court has held that Section 34 of the SARFAESI Act does not bar the Commercial Court from issuing any injunction in respect of any action under the SARFAESI Act. The learned Commercial Court reasoned that Section 34 of the SARFAESI Act only excludes jurisdiction in respect of matters that can be considered by the Debt Recovery Tribunal or the Appellate Tribunal under Sections 17 and 18 of the SARFAESI Act. Since, - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:22496-DB COMAP No. 128 of 2026 recourse to Section 17 of the SARFAESI Act may not be available till a measure under Section 13(4) of the SARFAESI Act is taken, the Commercial Court could issue an order restraining secured creditors from taking any such measures under the SARFAESI Act. Section 34 of the SARFAESI Act reads as under: "34. Civil court not to have jurisdiction. -No civil court shall have jurisdiction to entertain any suit or proceeding in respect of any matter which a Debts Recovery Tribunal or the Appellate Tribunal is empowered by or under this Act to determine and no injunction shall be granted by any court or other authority in respect of any action taken or to be taken in pursuance of any power conferred by or under this Act or under the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993 (51 of 1993)." 3. A plain reading of the said section indicates that it proscribes any Civil Court from issuing any injunction not only with respect to the action taken, but also to an action that may be taken, pursuant to the powers conferred under the SARFAESI Act or the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993. 4. In the aforesaid view, the impugned order passed by the learned Commercial Court is contrary to law. - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:22496-DB COMAP No. 128 of 2026 5. The learned counsel appearing for respondent No.1 fairly concedes that the impugned order to the extent that it restrains the appellants from invoking the provisions of the SARFAESI Act or taking any measures under the said Act is not sustainable. He, however, requests that the operative part of the order may be set aside, but only to the aforesaid extent. He contends that the other respondents have not challenged the impugned order and therefore the other directions which do not concern the appellants may be sustained. 6. In view of the above, the following direction issued in terms of the impugned order is set aside : "II. Respondent No.2 to 4 or their agents, and servants or any person claiming through under it from selling, transferring, alienating or creating any third party rights or interest directly or indirectly on the subject property and falsely claiming the subject property to be a secured asset and in particular wrongfully initiating any proceedings in respect thereof under Section 13(1)(2) of the SARFAESI Act or any other law until disposal of pending CMP No.589/2025 before the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka." 7. Before concluding, we also note that notice to respondent Nos.3 to 14 was dispensed with at the risk of the appellants. However, we also consider it apposite to clarify that this order - 11 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:22496-DB COMAP No. 128 of 2026 would not preclude the other respondents from availing of the remedies in respect of the impugned order. Nothing stated in this order shall be construed as this Court confirming either the prima facie findings of the learned Commercial Court or the dispositive order, as this Court has not examined any other aspect other than whether the direction could be issued restraining action under the SARFAESI Act. 8. The appeal is allowed with the aforesaid observations. Sd/- (VIBHU BAKHRU) CHIEF JUSTICE Sd/- (C.M. POONACHA) JUDGE SD List No.: 2 Sl No.: 16