- 1 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010585112026 NC: 2026:KHC:50006-DB WA No. 1972 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 15TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2026 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA WRIT APPEAL NO. 1972 OF 2026 (GM-DRT) BETWEEN: 1. MR. PRADEEP KUMAR R S/O RAMACHANDRAN T AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS REPRESENTING M/S PEP INFRA HAVING OFFICE AT NO.116/5-1, OLD NO.116 11TH CROSS ROAD MALLESHWARAM BBMP WARD NO.7 BENGALURU - 560 003 …APPELLANT (BY SRI DESAI RAJENDRA CHANDRASHEKAR, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE BANGALORE CITY CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD REP. BY ITS AUTHORIZED OFFICER HEAD OFFICE AT NO.3 PAMPA MAHAKAVI ROAD CHAMARAJPET BENGALURU - 560 018 ALSO HAVING ITS BRANCH OFFICE AT MAHALAKSHMIPURA BRANCH BENGALURU - 560 086 …RESPONDENT Digitally signed by AMBIKA H B Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010585112026 NC: 2026:KHC:50006-DB WA No. 1972 of 2026 THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT PRAYING TO ALLOW THE PRESENT WRIT APPEAL AND SET-ASIDE THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE IN W.P. No. 13729/2026 DATED 13.07.2026 & ETC. 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 MRS. JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE) 1. For the reasons stated in the application ˗ I.A No.1/2026, the same is allowed. The delay of 3 days in filing the appeal is condoned. 2. The appellant has filed the present appeal impugning an order dated 13.07.2026 passed by the learned Single Judge in Writ Petition No.13729/2026 (GM-DRT), whereby the learned Single Judge declined to entertain the said petition. 3. The appellant had filed the said petition, inter alia, praying that directions be issued to the respondent to de-seal and unlock - 3 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010585112026 NC: 2026:KHC:50006-DB WA No. 1972 of 2026 the demised premises and restore its possession to the appellant. The respondent had taken over the said premises pursuant to the proceedings initiated under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interests, 2002 [SARFAESI Act). 4. The learned Single Judge observed that law was well settled that a person aggrieved by the measures taken or initiated by the bank under SARFAESI Act is required to avail of statutory remedies and a writ petition in this regard ought not to be entertained. We find no infirmity with the said view. 5. Concededly, the appellant has received the possession notice under Section 13 (4) of the SARFAESI Act. The said notice is an appealable measure. The Hon'ble Supreme Court has in a number of decisions, including United Bank of India vs. Satyawati Tondon and others1 and PHR Invent Educational Society vs. UCO Bank and Others2 held that writ petitions against the orders passed under Section 13(4) of the SARFAESI Act where 1 (2010) 8 SCC 110 2 (2024) 6 SCC 579 - 4 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010585112026 NC: 2026:KHC:50006-DB WA No. 1972 of 2026 remedies are available before the Debts Recovery Tribunal or the appellate tribunal, are not to be entertained. 6. The appeal is accordingly dismissed. Sd/- (VIBHU BAKHRU) CHIEF JUSTICE Sd/- (K.S. HEMALEKHA) JUDGE AHB List No.: 2 Sl No.: 12