- 1 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010556152025 NC: 2026:KHC:37361 WP No. 25647 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF JULY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI M WRIT PETITION NO. 25647 OF 2025 (GM-DRT) BETWEEN: MR. GIRISH KUMAR K.T., AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, S/O. THIMMEGOWDA, NO.403,. 3RD FLOOR, 1ST MAIN ROAD, ITI LAYOUT, NAYANDANAHALLI MYSORE ROAD, NAYANDANAHALLI BENGALURU-560 039. ALSO AT FLAT NO.C-290, SECOND FLOOR, C-BLOCK, SIGMA SERENITY APARTMENRT, SITUATED IN SY.NO.173, NEW NO.223 OF INDLABELE VILLAGE, ATTIBLE VILLAGE, ANEKAL TALUK BENGALURU-562 107. …PETITIONER (BY SMT. RENUKA DEVI PATIL, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. M.A.RAJENDRA, ADVOCATE) AND: THE AUTHORISED OFFICER, BANK OF INDIA, NO.11, KEMPEGOWA ROAD, BENGALURU-560 009. …RESPONDENT (BY SMT. PREETHU, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. VIGNESH SHETTY, ADVOCATE) Digitally signed by PREMCHANDRA M R Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010556152025 NC: 2026:KHC:37361 WP No. 25647 of 2025 THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, SEEKING CERTAIN RELIEFS. THIS WRIT PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN "B" GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: ORAL ORDER Smt. Renuka Devi Patil, counsel on behalf of Sri. M.A.Rajendra, for the petitioner and Smt. Preethu, counsel on behalf of Sri. Vignesh Shetty, for the respondent appeared in person. 2. This petition is filed seeking following reliefs: "(a) Quash and set aside the impugned order passed by the Hon'ble Debt Recovery Tribunal, DRT-I, Bengaluru in S.A.No.578/2024 on 30th April, 2025 - (ANNEXURE-A). (b) Grant such other relief, which the Hon'ble Court deems fit under the facts and circumstances and on question of law, as stated Supra and in the Interest of Justice." 3. Counsel for the respective parties urged several contentions. Heard the arguments and perused the papers with care. - 3 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010556152025 NC: 2026:KHC:37361 WP No. 25647 of 2025 4. Suffice it to note that the DRT vide order dated:30.04.2025 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. 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 PHM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 52