- 1 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010157012025 NC: 2026:KHC:45444 WP No. 6770 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI M WRIT PETITION NO. 6770 OF 2025 (GM-DRT) BETWEEN: 1. SHRI. C.KESHAVA MURTHY, S/O. LATE B.CHINAPPA, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, 2. SHRI. C.R.RAGHUNATH, S/O. LATE B.CHINAPPA, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, 3. SHRI. C.R.DIWAKAR, S/O. LATE B.CHINAPPA, AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, ALL ARE RESIDING AT NO. 59, 12TH CROSS, 5TH MAIN, WILSON GARDEN, BENGALURU-560 030. …PETITIONERS (BY SMT. PRIYANKA S., ADVOCATE FOR SRI. VISHWANATH N., ADVOCATE) AND: THE AUTHORIZED OFFICER SREE THYAGARAJA CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD., NO.5, 9TH CROSS, N.R. COLONY, BENGALURU-560 019. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. LOKESH K.V., ADVOCATE) Digitally signed by PREMCHANDRA M R Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010157012025 NC: 2026:KHC:45444 WP No. 6770 of 2025 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.Priyanka S., counsel on behalf of Sri.Vishwanath N., for the petitioners and Sri.Lokesh K.V., counsel for respondent appeared in person. 2. This petition is filed seeking following reliefs: (i) Issue a writ, Order or direction in the nature of certiorari and quash the impugned possession notice dated 7th February, 2025, issued by the respondent in respect of property of the petitioners as per Annexure-A. (ii) Issue any other suitable writ or direction as this Hon'ble Court deems fit to grant under the facts and circumstances of the above case, in the interest of justice and equity. - 3 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010157012025 NC: 2026:KHC:45444 WP No. 6770 of 2025 3. Counsel for the respective parties urged several contentions. Heard the arguments and perused the papers with care. 4. The authorized officer of the Bank issued possession notice on 07.02.2025. The petitioners grievance is about the issuance of the possession notice. Any person/s aggrieved by issuance of notices under SARFAESI Act/ Rules are not powerless. They have a liberty of filing objections and also approach DRT, appealing to the Tribunal if needed. 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 - 4 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010157012025 NC: 2026:KHC:45444 WP No. 6770 of 2025 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 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 - 5 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010157012025 NC: 2026:KHC:45444 WP No. 6770 of 2025 petitions. Hence, I decline to exercise discretionary power under writ jurisdiction. The petition is devoid of merits. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. The petitioners may approach appropriate forum if so advised and if the law permits. Because of dismissal of 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.: 14