- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:29201 WP No. 15473 of 2026 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. 15473 OF 2026 (GM-DRT) BETWEEN: SRI. V.NAGARAJ GUPTA, S/O. LATE PATANARAYANASETTY, AGED ABOUT 76 YEARS, R/AT NO.157, 11TH CROSS, NRUPATUNGA NAGAR, NGEF LAYOUT, BENGALURU-560072. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. N.MANOHAR, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE MANAGING DIRECTORS, M/S. SREE SUBRAMANYESHWARA CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD., HEAD OFFICE NO.106, RAJATHA BHAVAN, R.V. ROAD, VISVESWARAPURAM, BENGALURU-560004. INDIA. 2. M/S. GOLDMINE ENTERPRISES PVT. LTD., OFFICE AT SHED NO.5, SY. NO.56/2, MACHO HALLI, DASANAPURA HOBLI, BENGALURU NORTH, BENGALURU-560091. REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTORS VINAY KUMAR N., AND YOGESH B.S., …RESPONDENTS THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, SEEKING CERTAIN RELIEFS. Digitally signed by GEETHA P G Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:29201 WP No. 15473 of 2026 THIS WRIT PETITION IS LISTED FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, AN ORDER IS MADE AS UNDER: ORAL ORDER Sri.N.Manohar, counsel for the petitioner appeared in person. 2. This petition is filed seeking following reliefs: (a) Issue a writ of certiorari or any other writ like nature and quash the possession notice dated 03.03.2026 issued by the respondent No.1 - Bank bearing Ref No.SSCB/AO/401/2025-26 under Section 13(4) of the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 vide Annexure-C to the writ petition insofar as petitioner is concerned is null and void. (b) The sale intimation notice dated 16.04.2026 issued by the respondent Bank under Rule 8(6) of the Security Interest (Enforcement) Rules vide Annexure-D bearing Ref No.SSCB/AO/19/2026-27 is null and void with respect to the petitioner only. (c) Grant any other remedy that this Hon'ble Court deems fit in the facts and circumstances of the case. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:29201 WP No. 15473 of 2026 3. Counsel for the petitioner urged several contentions. Heard the arguments and perused the papers with care. 4. 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 possession notice cannot be challenged by filing a writ 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. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:29201 WP No. 15473 of 2026 Moreover, the Apex Court has also observed in the case of UNITED BANK OF INDIA V/S. SATYAWATI TONDON AND OTHERS that the High Courts continue to ignore the availability of statutory remedies under the DRT and SARFAESI Act and exercised jurisdiction under Article 226 for passing orders which have serious adverse impact on the right of the 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 great caution, care and circumspection. Hence, I decline to exercise power under writ jurisdiction. The petition is devoid of merits. 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.: 2