- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:2156 WP No. 15383 of 2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 14TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI WRIT PETITION NO. 15383 OF 2022 (GM-DRT) BETWEEN: 1. TRAEGEN SYSTEMS PRIVATE LIMITED A COMPANY REGISTERED UNDER COMPANIES ACT HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT 209 C, 1ST FLOOR HBR LAYOUT 1ST STAGE 2ND BLOCK BENGALURU - 560 043, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR TIMOTHY CHARLES 2. TIMOTHY CHARLES AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS, S/O MR DAVID PRABAHAR, RESIDING AT 2B DAFFODILS TRINITY FORTUNE LAYOUT GEDDALAHALLI BENGALURU - 560 077 3. JEFFERSON ELEAZER DHARMARAJ AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS, S/O MR PHILEMON VIJAYAKUMAR DHARMARAJ, RESIDING AT NO 40 BLOCK 1, BLESSING GARDEN OFF HENNUR ROAD, BYRATHI BENGALURU - 560 077 Digitally signed by MEGHA MOHAN Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:2156 WP No. 15383 of 2022 4. PHILEMON VIJAYAKUMAR DHARMARAJ AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS, S/O MR. DHARMARAJ SAMUEL RESIDING AT NO.40, BLOCK 1, BLESSING GARDEN OFF. HENNUR ROAD, BYRATHI BENGALURU - 560 077 5. ANDERSON EBENEZER DHARMARAJ AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS, S/O MR PHILEMON VIJAYAKUMAR DHARMARAJ, RESIDING AT NO 40 BLOCK 1, BLESSING GARDEN OFF. HENNUR ROAD, BYRATHI BENGALURU - 560 077 …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. DHANUSH M., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SOUTH INDIAN BANK LIMITED REPRESENTED BY THE AUTHORIZED OFFICER AND ITS THE CHIEF MANAGER SIB ARCADE, NO.61, WHEELER ROAD, COX TOWN BENGALURU - 560 005 2. CENTRAL REGISTRY OF SECURITISATION ASSET RECONSTRUCTION AND SECURITY INTEREST OF INDIA (CERSAI) GOVERNMENT OF INDIA COMPANY LICENSED UNDER SECTION 8 OF THE COMPANIES ACT 2013 2ND FLOOR REAR BLOCK 3 JEEVAN VIHAR BUILDING - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:2156 WP No. 15383 of 2022 NEAR PATEL CROSS ROAD METRO STATION NEW DELHI - 110 001 3. REGISTRAR OF COMPANIES (ROC) MINISTRY OF CORPORATE AFFAIRS (MCA) E WING, 2ND FLOOR, KENDRIYA SADANA KORAMANGALA, BANGALORE - 560 034 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. FRANCIS XAVIER, ADVOCATE FOR C/R1 SMT. ANUPAMA HEGDE, CGSC FOR R2) THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER OF THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-I, KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DTD 13.05.2022 IN S.A.NO.327/2021 DISMISSING THE APPLICATION OF THE PETITIONERS UNDER SECTION 17 OF THE SARFAESI ACT VIDE ANNX-A. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:2156 WP No. 15383 of 2022 ORAL ORDER The present writ petition is filed seeking the following prayers: “A. Issue a writ of Certiorari or any other appropriate Writ, Order or Direction to quash the order of the Hon'ble Debts Recovery Tribunal-1, Karnataka at Bengaluru dated May 13, 2022 in SA. No. 327/2021 dismissing the application of the Petitioners under Section 17 of the SARFAESI Act. [Annexure A]. B. Issue a writ of Certiorari or any other appropriate Writ, Order or Direction to quash and set aside the order of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bengaluru Rural District in Crl. Misc. No. 179/2022 dated March 17, 2022 issued under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act allowing South Indian Bank to take possession of the alleged Subject Property of the Petitioner at Byarthi Village, Bidarahalli hobli, Bangalore. [Annexure B]. C. Issue a writ of Certiorari or any other appropriate Writ, Order or Direction to quash and set aside the Tender Cum Auction Sale Notice dated July 13, 2022 issued by the Respondent No. 1 [Annexure C]. D. Issue a writ of Mandamus or any other Writ, Order or Direction to the Respondent No.1 to restore physical possession of the Subject Property to the Petitioners. E. Issue a writ of Certiorari or any other appropriate Writ, Order or Direction to quash the communication no. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:2156 WP No. 15383 of 2022 CERSAI/3291/2021 dated November 29, 2021 by the Respondent No.2 [Annexure D]. F. Issue any other such appropriate writ, order or direction as this Hon'ble Court deems fit, in the interests of justice and equity.” 2. The brief facts of the case are the petitioners had obtained a loan and created a mortgage by way of security interest over a vacant land belonging to petitioner No.4 on 06.10.2004. Thereafter, on 11.12.2014, petitioner No.1 was sanctioned a term loan-I of Rs.5,00,000/- by respondent No.1/Bank. When the account has become NPA, respondent No.1 had issued demand notice on 03.09.2020 under Section 13(2) of the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (for short ‘SARFAESI Act’). Subsequently, on 29.09.2021, a possession notice was issued under Section 13(4) SARFAESI Act read with Rule 8(1) of the Security interest (Enforcement) Rules, 2002. Thereafter, on 13.10.2021, a sale notice was issued under Section 13(8) of the SARFAESI Act read with Rule 8(6) of the Rules. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:2156 WP No. 15383 of 2022 3. Aggrieved by the measures initiated by the Bank, the petitioners filed SA under Section 17(1) of the SARFAESI Act, on 02.11.2021 before the Debts Recovery Tribunal (for short 'DRT'), which came to be dismissed by order dated 13.05.2022. The said order is questioned before this Court. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the prayer seeking to quash the Communication No. CERSAI/3291/2021 dated 29.11.2021 by respondent No.2 is a pure question of law, whether the requirement of registration of the secured asset is mandatory or directory. It is submitted that such a question cannot be adjudicated by the Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal, and therefore, the petitioners have approached this Court by filing the present writ petition. 4. It is further submitted that the issue as to whether the secured asset was registered or not, and if not, whether proceedings under the provisions of the SARFAESI Act could have been initiated, requires consideration by this Court. It is submitted that though there is an alternative remedy available to the petitioners, still they can come before this Court as - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:2156 WP No. 15383 of 2022 prayer No.‘E’ alone be decided by this Court but not by the Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal (for short 'DRAT'). 5. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent/Bank submits that when the petitioners filed the Securitisation Application, the issue with regard to 26-D of the SARFAESI Act was questioned and the DRT after considering all the aspects, dismissed the said S.A. It is submitted that, once the S.A. is dismissed, the remedy that is available to the petitioners is to approach the DRAT, without approaching the DRAT, the petitioners have filed the present writ petition. It is further submitted that the writ petition was filed in the year 2022 and a conditional interim order dated 12.08.2022 was passed by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court, directing the petitioners to deposit an amount of Rs.50,00,000/- within two weeks and a further sum of Rs.50,00,000/- within the next two weeks, failing which the respondent/Bank is at liberty to confirm the sale. Learned counsel submits that the petitioners failed to comply with the said interim order. 6. It is further submitted that prayer ‘C’ in the writ petition seeks to challenge the tender-cum-auction sale notice - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:2156 WP No. 15383 of 2022 dated 13.07.2022. However, since the sale could not be conducted pursuant to the said notice, a fresh sale notification was issued on 26.06.2023. Thereafter, the auction was conducted on 14.07.2023, a sale certificate was issued on 19.09.2023 and possession of the secured asset was delivered to the auction purchaser. It is submitted that the petitioners have not questioned the subsequent sales and the possession has already been delivered. At this stage, without questioning all that, the present writ petition filed before this Court, is not maintainable. Therefore, learned counsel submits that the writ petition is liable to be dismissed. 7. Having head the counsels on either side, perused the material on record. S.A. No.327/2021 was dismissed by the DRT on 13.05.2022 and all these issues with regard to Section 26-D of the SARFAESI Act were raised and considered before the Tribunal. The submission of the learned counsel for the petitioners is, that issue can only be decided by this Court and the DRAT cannot decide the same, this Court do not find any force in the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner. On a specific query by this Court as to whether the - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:2156 WP No. 15383 of 2022 issue relating to Section 26-D of the SARFAESI Act was raised by the petitioners in their reply to the notice issued under Section 13(2) of the Act, the learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the same could not be raised at that point of time. The auction notice that is questioned in the writ petition, that relief has become infructuous, as the respondents did not conduct the auction pursuant to the said notice. Subsequently, the respondents conducted auction, issued the sale certificate and also delivered the possession of the secured asset to the auction purchaser. 8. According to the petitioners, this aspect of auction is not within their knowledge as nothing was communicated to him. Even if that is so, the same can be questioned by the petitioners before the Forum that has been specifically created for the purpose of adjudicating disputes under the SARFAESI Act. Pendency of the present writ petition since the year 2022, without assailing any of the subsequent auction proceedings of the Bank and keeping this writ petition pending before this Court will not serve any purpose to the petitioners. That apart, the petitioners have an efficacious alternative remedy before - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:2156 WP No. 15383 of 2022 the DRAT. In that view of the matter, this Court is passing the following: ORDER i) The writ petition is disposed of, giving liberty to the petitioners to avail the appropriate remedy available to them in accordance with law. ii) All issues are kept open to be decided by the appropriate forum. iii) All I.As. in this petition shall stand closed. SD/- (LALITHA KANNEGANTI) JUDGE SMC List No.: 1 Sl No.: 1