- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:6696 WP No. 4884 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 3RD DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S.KINAGI WRIT PETITION NO. 4884 OF 2024 (GM-DRT) BETWEEN: MRS LATHA PRASAD W/O B. RAMPRASAD, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, R/AT FLAT NO.S4, STANPARK APARTMENT, VALENCIA PARK VIEW ROAD, KANKANADI, MANGALORE, DAKSHINA KANNADA -575002 …PETITIONER (BY SRI. RAKSHITH KUMAR., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. BHARATH CO OPERATIVE BANK (MUMBAI) LTD REP. BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER, HAVING ITS OFFICE AT VEENU SKY PLAZA, MOODABIDRI, KARKALA ROAD, Digitally signed by SUNITHA K S Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:6696 WP No. 4884 of 2024 MOODABIDRI, DAKSHINA KANNADA-574227 REGISTERED UNDER CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY ACT 1957 2. MR. BOLAR RAM PRASAD S/O LATE H.S. POOJARY, AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS, R/AT FLAT NO.S4, STANPARK APARTMENT, VALENCIA PARK VIEW ROAD, KANKANADI, MANGALORE, DAKSHINA KANNADA-575002 …RESPONDENTS [BY SRI. H.R. SUNIL KUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR C/R1 IN (CP 3727/24)] THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 13/12/2023 PASSED IN CRL. MISC. NO. 409/2023 PENDING BEFORE THE PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND CJM, MANGALORE, DAKSHINA KANNADA VIDE ANNEXURE-A AND CONSEQUENTLY QUASH THE POSSESSION NOTICE DATED 07/02/2024 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT BANK IN REF. NO. BCB/HAM/RECOVERY AND LEGAL/ 624/2024 VIDE ABNNEXURE-A1. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:6696 WP No. 4884 of 2024 THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S.KINAGI ORAL ORDER The petitioner, aggrieved by the order dated 13.12.2023 passed in Crl.Misc.No.409/2023 by the learned Principal Senior Civil Judge and CJM, Mangalore, Dakshina Kannada vide Annexure-A, and also possession notice dated 07.02.2024 issued by the respondent-Bank vide Annexure-A1, filed this petition. 2. The impugned order and notice is an appealable order under the provisions of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002. The petitioner, without exhausting the equal efficacious remedy, filed this writ petition. The writ petition is not maintainable in view of the proposition of law laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Rikhab Chand Jain Vs. Union of India and - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:6696 WP No. 4884 of 2024 Others1. Hence, I do not find any grounds to entertain the writ petition. 3. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed reserving a liberty to the petitioners to challenge the impugned order and notice before the appropriate forum, if so advised. 4. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of accordingly. Sd/- (ASHOK S.KINAGI) JUDGE PA CT:KHV List No.: 1 Sl No.: 25 1 2025 SCC OnLine SC 2510