- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:30709 WP No. 18460 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF JUNE, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI M WRIT PETITION NO. 18460 OF 2026 (GM-DRT) BETWEEN: MR. RAHUL JAIN, S/O. RAMESH CHANDRA JAIN, AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS, PRESENTLY RESIDING AT DUBAI, UAE. PERMANENTLY RESIDING AT NO.202, FLOOR NO.3, BLOCK 'A', TNR, VAISHNOVI THUBARAHALLI, BENGALURU-560066. REP. BY HIS POA HOLDER MR. RAMESH CHAND JAIN, AGED ABOUT 69 YEARS, C/O. 87, WARD NO.15, KARTA BAZAR, MAIHAR, MADHYA PRADESH-485771. …PETITIONER (BY SMT. BEENA P.K., ADVOCATE) AND: GODREJ HOUSING FINANCE LIMITED, REGISTERED UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT 2013 OFFICE AT GODREJ ONE, PIROJSAHNAGAR, EASTERN EXPRESS HIGHWAY, VIKKHROLI (EAST), MUMBAI, MAHARASHTRA-400079. AND BRANCH OFFICE AT GV TOWERS, NO.68-72, FIRST FLOOR, Digitally signed by GEETHA P G Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:30709 WP No. 18460 of 2026 KODIGEHALLI MAIN ROAD, SAHAKARNAGAR, BENGALURU-560092. REP. BY ITS LEGAL MANAGER MR. LOKESH …RESPONDENT 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 Smt.Beena.P.K., counsel for the petitioner appeared in person. 2. Though the matter is listed today for preliminary hearing, it is heard. 3. This petition is filed seeking following reliefs: (i) Issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ, Order or Direction directing the respondent to furnish a complete, updated statement of accounts together with the basis of computation of the alleged outstanding amount in respect of the Housing Loan Account availed by the petitioner; (ii) Issue a Writ of Certiorari to quash the Notice dated 25/05/2026 (Annexure-A) and all the - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:30709 WP No. 18460 of 2026 coercive proceedings initiated against the petitioner's property based on the Loan Account Nos. GHF1401HL0009123 and GHF1402FL0013736; (iii) Issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, Order, or Direction directing the respondent to forthwith release and restore the Schedule Property, being the residential flat at Sonestaa Silver Oak, Thubarahalli, Bangalore, from possession, and to remove the seal affixed thereon; (iv) Issue appropriate Writ or Direction or order, or grant such other relief/s as this Court may deem fit and proper from time to time for this petitioner to attain the ends of justice. 4. 4. Counsel for the petitioner urged several contentions. Heard the arguments and perused the papers with care. 5. The authorized officer of the Godrej Housing Finance Limited issued Possession notice on 25.05.2026. The petitioner's grievance is about the issuance of the possession notice. Any person/s served with SARFAESI Act notices are not powerless. They have a liberty of filing objections and also approach DRT under Section 17 of the Act, appealing to the - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:30709 WP No. 18460 of 2026 Tribunal if needed. The relief sought by the petitioner's 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 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. 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 - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:30709 WP No. 18460 of 2026 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. 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(2) and 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. 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 MRP List No.: 1 Sl No.: 19