- 1 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010383762022 NC: 2026:KHC:55437 WP No. 16838 of 2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM WRIT PETITION NO. 16838 OF 2022 (GM-DRT) BETWEEN: 1. MR. JUNAID MELKAR ABBAS S/O ABBAS PANE MANGALORE AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS R/AT FLAT NO.410 PEARL RESIDENCY, B-MOODA KAIKAMBA, JODUMARGA DAKSHINA KANNADA-574 219. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. VINAY KUMAR V.R., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. CANARA BANK A GOVT. OF INDIA UNDERTAKING ARM BRANCH, CO BUILDING MANGALURU-575 001. REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORISED OFFICER JALLESH DINAKARAN. 2. M/S IKHALAS FAMILY FASHION AND FAMILY CARE HAVING ITS OFFICE AT GROUND FLOOR AND FIRST FLOOR MH HEIGHTS, MELKAR Digitally Signed By: SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM Verified - 2 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010383762022 NC: 2026:KHC:55437 WP No. 16838 of 2022 BANTWAL, KARNATAKA-574 231 REPRESNETED BY ITS PROPRIETOR MR. PM.ABBAS. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. BRIJESH CHANDER GURU, ADVOCATE FOR R1) THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE SALE NOTICE DATED 11.07.2022 VIDE REF:ARM/MNG/F293/170- 2022-23 ISSUED BY RESPONDENT NO.1 AS THE SAME IS WITHOUT FOLLOWING MANDATORY PROVISIONS AS CONTEMPLATED UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF THE SECURITIZATION AND RECONSTRUCTION OF FINANCIAL ASSETS AND ENFORCEMENT OF SECURITY INTEREST ACT (VIDE ANNEXURE-A) AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM ORAL ORDER The captioned petition is filed by the default borrower assailing the sale notice of secured assets by invoking the provisions of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (hereinafter referred to as 'SARFAESI Act'). Contrary Digitally Signed By: SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM Verified - 3 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010383762022 NC: 2026:KHC:55437 WP No. 16838 of 2022 to consistent view taken by the Hon'ble Apex Court and directions issued to the writ Court not to entertain writ petition filed by the default borrower, however, this Court granted some indulgence and stalled the recovery proceedings subject to petitioner depositing the sum of Rs.38,00,000/- in 3 installments. 2. There is no representation on behalf of the petitioner. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent- bank on instructions, submits that the interim order is not complied. 4. Be that as it may, since the petitioner is questioning the action contemplated by the respondent- bank invoking the provisions of SARFAESI Act, this Court is of the view that the writ petition is not maintainable and petitioner ought to have availed the remedy under Section 17 of the SARFAESI Act. Digitally Signed By: SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM Verified - 4 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010383762022 NC: 2026:KHC:55437 WP No. 16838 of 2022 5. Therefore, this Court is of the view that in the light of law declared by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of United Bank of India vs. Satyavati Tondon and Others reported in [(2010) 8 SCC 110], that writ petition is not maintainable. The conduct of the petitioner also appears to be grossly unfair, having obtained interim order, not a single ruppee is deposited with the respondent-bank. The petition is accordingly dismissed. (SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM) JUDGE PGG List No.: 1 Sl No.: 8 Digitally Signed By: SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM Verified