- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:20291-DB WA No. 128 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF APRIL, 2026 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA WRIT APPEAL NO. 128 OF 2026 (GM-DRT) BETWEEN: 1. MR RAMCHANDRANDRA S/O GUJJAPA AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS 2. MR PRAKASH R S/O RAMACHANDRA AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS 3. MR HARISH R S/O RAMACHANDRA AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS THE APPELLANTS No.1 TO 3 ARE RESIDING AT NO. 42 1ST FLOOR SRI LAKSHMI VENKATESHWARA NILAYA 9TH MAIN ROAD NEAR ICICI BANK ATM HONGASANDRA NORTH BENGALURU-560048 …APPELLANTS (BY SRI. SRIKANTH A, ADVOCATE) AND: M/S TUMKUR GRAIN MERCHANTS CO-OERATIVE BANK LTD Digitally signed by NIRMALA DEVI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:20291-DB WA No. 128 of 2026 ADMIN OFFICE BH ROAD TUMKUR -572103 IFSC CODE: TGMB00000001 RERESENTED BY ITS AUTHORISED OFFICER MR RAJAJSHEKAR …RESPONDENT THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED U/S 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT, 1961 R/W WRIT PROCEEDINGS RULES PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER PASSED BY THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE IN WP No. 32520/2025 DATED 31.10.2025 AND ALLOW THE WRIT APPEAL AS PRAYED FOR, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE and HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE) 1. The appellants have filed the present appeal impugning an order dated 31.10.2025 passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P. No.32520/2025 (GM-DRT). 2. The appellants had field the said writ petition inter alia impugning an e-Auction Sale Notice dated 15.10.2025 issued by the respondent-Bank. The said notice had been issued pursuant to - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:20291-DB WA No. 128 of 2026 proceedings initiated under Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act (SARFAESI Act). 3. In view of the above, learned Single Judge had declined to entertain the writ petition by reserving liberty to the petitioners to avail an alternative remedy. 4. Learned counsel for the appellants does not dispute that the remedy to approach the concerned Debt Recovery Tribunal under Section 17 of the SARFAESI Act is available. 5. In view of the above, we find no infirmity with the decision of the learned Single Judge in declining to entertain the writ petition. 6. The appeal is accordingly, dismissed. Sd/- (VIBHU BAKHRU) CHIEF JUSTICE Sd/- (C.M. POONACHA) JUDGE BS/ List No.: 2 Sl No.: 19