- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:32324 WP No. 187 of 2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 30TH DAY OF JUNE, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI M WRIT PETITION NO. 187 OF 2022 (GM-DRT) BETWEEN: SMT. MARY PHILOMENA @ AMALAMMA AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS, W/O. SRI. SUSAIRAJ REPRESENTED BY HER PA HOLDER MR. S.LAWRENCE, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS S/O. SRI. SUSAIRAJ R/AT NO 49, (NORTHERN PORTION) JAKKUR LAYOUT, 2ND B CROSS, YELAHANKA HOBLI, BENGALURU-560064. …PETITIONER (BY SMT. VINUTHA, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. RAMANA M.V.V., ADVOCATE FOR SRI. RAMA R. IYER, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. UNION BANK OF INDIA, VIJAYANAGAR BRANCH NO.56, PUSHPAGIRI COMPLEX, 17TH CROSS, MAGADI CHORD ROAD, VIJAYANAGAR, BENGALURU-560040. 2. MR. R.RAJENDRAN, AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS, S/O. SRI. RAMACHANDRA MENON, R/AT NO.500, 15TH CROSS, INDIRANAGAR II STAGE, BENGALURU-560040. Digitally signed by PREMCHANDRA M R Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:32324 WP No. 187 of 2022 3. N.SURESH BABU, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, W/O. GANGAIAH, R/O. M /S. DHANALAKSHMI ENTERPRISES, NO.24, 19TH CROSS, LAKSHMI PURAM, BENGALURU-560058. 4. RECOVERY OFFICER DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL - 1 JEEVAN MANGAL BUILDING (SECOND FLOOR) NO.04, RESIDENCY ROAD, BENGALURU-560025. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. T.P.MUTHANNA, ADVOCATE FOR R1) 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 Smt.Vinutha., counsel on behalf of Sri.Ramana.M.V.V., for the petitioner and Sri.T.P.Muthanna., counsel for respondent No.1 have appeared in person. 2. The petition is filed seeking following reliefs. a) Set aside the order passed by the Debt Recovery Tribunal-I, Bengaluru in IR - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:32324 WP No. 187 of 2022 4481/2019 dated:29.06.2020 produced as Annexure-B. b) Such other order /direction as this Court deems fit in the circumstances of the case including an order as to costs. 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 DRT vide order dated:29.06.2020 passed the final order. The law is settled that any person aggrieved by the order of the DRT must file an appeal before DRAT. In the present case, the petitioner has not exhausted the statutory remedy and has invoked the writ jurisdiction. As there is an alternate remedy as contemplated under Section 18 of the SARFAESI Act to approach DRAT. This Court declines to exercise the discretionary power under writ jurisdiction. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:32324 WP No. 187 of 2022 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.: 18