- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:5311 WP No. 37231 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 30TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S.KINAGI WRIT PETITION NO. 37231 OF 2025 (GM-DRT) BETWEEN: 1. SRI. PRAKASH D S/O LATE DODDAIAH, AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS, R/AT PROPERTY NO.166/121, B HOSAHALLI VILLAGE, JAGARAVALLI GRAMA PANCHAYATH, HASSAN TALUK, HASSAN DISTRICT-573220. 2. SMT. KAMALA P, W/O PRAKASHA D, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, R/AT PROPERTY NO.166/121, B HOSAHALLI VILLAGE, JAGARAVALLI GRAMA PANCHAYATH, HASSAN TALUK, HASSAN DISTRICT-573220. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. SATHISHA D J., ADVOCATE) AND: IDFC FIRST BANK LIMITED, REGISTERED UNDER THE BANKING REGULATION ACT, 1949 NO.9 CALAVALAS CENTENARY CENTRE, ANNA SALAI, CHENNAI-600002. Digitally signed by KIRAN KUMAR R Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:5311 WP No. 37231 of 2025 REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORIZED OFFICER MR. JOSEPH RAHUL A. …RESPONDENT THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO (1) ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI OR ANY OTHER APPROPRIATE WRIT, ORDER OR DIRECTION, QUASHING THE ORDER IN CRL MISC NO.57/2025 DATED 5/7/2025 AT ANNEXURE-E PASSED IN PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND CJM, HASSAN, AND QUASHING THE INTIMATION DATED 26/11/2025 AT ANNEXURE-F BY THE RESPONDENT BANK, AND CONSEQUENTLY RESTORED THE POSSESSION FROM THE RESPONDENT BANK, ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S.KINAGI ORAL ORDER The petitioners, aggrieved by the order dated 05.07.2025 passed in Crl.Misc.No.57/2025 by the learned Principal Senior Civil Judge and CJM, Hassan vide Annexure-E under Section 14 of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (‘SARFAESI Act’ for short), filed this petition. 2. The impugned order is an appealable order under the provisions of the SARFAESI Act. The petitioners, without - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:5311 WP No. 37231 of 2025 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 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 before the appropriate forum, if so advised. 4. In the meanwhile, the respondent is directed not to take any coercive steps for 15 days from today. 5. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of accordingly. Sd/- (ASHOK S.KINAGI) JUDGE PA List No.: 2 Sl No.: 28 1 2025 SCC OnLine SC 2510