- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:26648 WP No. 16381 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF JUNE, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI M WRIT PETITION NO. 16381 OF 2026 (GM-DRT) BETWEEN: 1. M/S. SHOMA AUTOMATION PVT. LTD., HAVING REGISTERED OFFICE AT C-28, 2ND MAIN, 2ND STAGE, PEENYA INDUSTRIAL AREA, BENGALURU-560058. AND M/S SHOMA AUTOMATION PVT. LTD., HAVING REGISTERED OFFICE AT C-65, 2ND CROSS, 2ND STAGE, PEENYA INDUSTRIAL AREA, BENGALURU-560058. REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTORS. 2. MR. MADHUKAR PATIL, S/O. SRI. AJJANAGOUDA A PATIL, DIRECTOR M/S SHOMA AUTOMATION PVT. LTD., NO.44, GF-1, MADHAVA RESIDENCY, DOLLAR SCHEME, 2ND CIRCULAR ROAD, NANDINI LAYOUT, BENGALURU -560096. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. VIKYATH B., ADVOCATE) AND: STATE BANK OF INDIA SSI PEENYA INDUSTRIAL ESTATE BRANCH (40284) NO.120, NEAR TVS CROSS, 100FEET ROAD, 3RD PHASE, PEENYA INDUSTRIAL AREA, 1ST STAGE, BENGALURU, KARNATAKA 560058. Digitally signed by GEETHA P G Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:26648 WP No. 16381 of 2026 REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORISED OFFICER MR. NAGARAJA A., …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. NANDISH PATIL, ADVOCATE FOR C/R) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, SEEKING CERTAIN RELIEFS. THIS WRIT PETITION IS LISTED FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, AN ORDER IS MADE AS UNDER: ORAL ORDER Sri.Vikyath.B, counsel for the petitioners and Sri.Nandish Patil, counsel for the caveator/ respondent have appeared in person. 2. Though the matter is listed today for preliminary hearing, it is heard: 3. The writ petition is filed seeking following reliefs: The petitioners humbly pray that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to pass an order / writ / direction / mandamus / certiorari to (a) Set aside the E auction which is held on 08.06.2026 which is at Annexure-A and consequently restrained the 1st respondent from issuing sale certificate. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:26648 WP No. 16381 of 2026 (b) Grant such other and further reliefs based on nature and circumstances of the above case in the interest of justice and equity vide Annexure-A. 4. Counsel for the respective parties urged several contentions. Heard the arguments and perused the papers with care. 5. The petitioners grievance is about the issuance of the Sale Notice. The relief sought by the petitioners cannot be granted under writ jurisdiction. The Apex Court has settled the law in a catena of decisions that Sale and Possession Notice cannot be challenged by filing a writ petition. The petition is devoid of merits. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. Sd/- (JYOTI M) JUDGE SS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 9