- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:29204 WP No. 9895 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF JUNE, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI M WRIT PETITION NO. 9895 OF 2023 (GM-DRT) BETWEEN: M/S. RAJESH EXPORTS LIMITED, A COMPANY REGISTERED UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT 1956, HAVING A REGISTERED OFFICE AT NO.4, BATAVIA CHAMBERS, KUMARA KRUPA ROAD, KUMARA PARK EAST, BENGALURU-560001. REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN MR. RAJESH MEHTA. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. RAGHU H.P., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. CANARA BANK, A COMPANY REGISTERED UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT 1956, PRIME CORPORATE BRANCH, RAMANASHREE ARCADE, 3RD FLOOR, M.G.ROAD, BENGALURU-560001. REPRESENTED BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER. 2. AUTHORISED OFFICER, CANARA BANK, RAMANASHREE ARCADE, 3RD FLOOR, M.G. ROAD, BENGALURU-560001. Digitally signed by GEETHA P G Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:29204 WP No. 9895 of 2023 REPRESENTED BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. C.K.NANDAKUMAR, SENIOR ADVOCATE FOR SRI. HEMANTH R.RAO, ADVOCATE) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, SEEKING CERTAIN RELIEFS. THIS WRIT PETITION IS LISTED FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, AN ORDER IS MADE AS UNDER: ORAL ORDER Sri.Raghu H.P., counsel for the petitioner appeared in person. Sri.C.K.Nandakumar, Senior counsel on behalf of Sri.Hemanth R.Rao, counsel for respondents appeared through video conferencing. 2. This petition is filed seeking following reliefs: a. Issue a Writ of certiorari or any other appropriate Writ, Order or direction quashing the Impugned Possession Notice dated 23/03/2023 issued by the Respondent No.2 under Sec.13(4) of the SARFAESI Act as per Annexure "A" as void abinitio. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:29204 WP No. 9895 of 2023 b. Issue a Writ of certiorari or any other appropriate Writ, Order or direction quashing the classification of the Petitioner's account as NPA and directing the Respondent No.1 Bank to classify the account of the Petitioner as a normal account. c. Issue a Writ of certiorari or any other appropriate Writ, Order or direction for appointing an appropriate agency or auditors to verify the due balance and arrive at the correct and true balance receivable/payable by the Petitioner to/from the Respondent No.1 Bank. d. Pass such other Order or Orders as deemed fit and proper in the circumstances of the case in the interest of Justice and Equity. 3. Counsel for the respective parties urged several contentions. Heard the arguments and perused the papers with care. 4. Suffice it to note that the authorized officer of the Bank had issued notice under Section 13(4) of the SARFAESI Act, 2002 on 23.03.2023. The petitioner's grievance is about the issuance of the possession notice. The relief sought by the petitioner cannot be granted under writ jurisdiction. The Apex Court has settled the law in a catena of decisions that a demand/ possession notice cannot be challenged by filing a writ - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:29204 WP No. 9895 of 2023 petition. The litigants are not remediless, as the Tribunal has been established specifically to adjudicate the lis. It is significant to note that Article 226 is not intended to circumvent statutory procedures. When a right or liability is created by a statute which itself prescribes the remedy or procedure for enforcing the right or liability, resort must be had to that particular statutory remedy before seeking the discretionary remedy under Article 226. The law is also well settled that a petition under Article 226 should not be entertained unless the statutory remedies are ill-suited to meet the demands of an extraordinary situation. The Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of UNION BANK OF INDIA VS. SATYAVATI TANDON AND OTHERS reported in Civil Appeal No. arising out of SLP No.10145/2010 has observed as under: 27. It is a matter of serious concern that despite repeated pronouncement of this Court, the High Courts continue to ignore the availability of statutory remedies under the DRT Act and SARFAESI Act and exercise jurisdiction under Article 226 for passing orders which have serious adverse impact on the - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:29204 WP No. 9895 of 2023 right of banks and other financial institutions to recover their dues. We hope and trust that in future the High Courts will exercise their discretion in such matters with greater caution, care and circumspection. The Apex Court in Phoenix Case's has held that filing of writ petition before the High Court under Article 226 of Constitution of India is an abuse of process of the Court. It is also observed that whenever a notice is issued under Section 13(4) of the SARFAESI Act, a litigant has statutory efficacious remedy by filing an appeal under the SARFAESI Act, and has cautioned the High Courts not to entertain the writ petitions. Hence, I decline to exercise power under writ jurisdiction. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. Because of dismissal the Writ Petition, interim order granted if any stands discharged and pending interlocutory applications if any are disposed of. SD/- (JYOTI M) JUDGE SS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 7