- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:17812 WP No. 8189 of 2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 1ST DAY OF APRIL, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI WRIT PETITION NO. 8189 OF 2022 (GM-DRT) BETWEEN: SHRI SATHYANARAYANA S/O LATE SHRI NARAYANAPPA AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS MANAGING DIRECTOR M/S HIRANMAYI GRANITES AND MINERALS NO.7, V-2, VASUDHA APARTMENTS FLAT NO.203, 9TH MAIN, SRINIVAS NAGAR BANASHANKARI 1ST STAGE BENGALURU - 560 040. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. KAVITHA D., ADVOCATE (VC)) AND: M/S. STATE BANK OF INDIA BUS STAND Digitally signed by SUVARNA T Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:17812 WP No. 8189 of 2022 CTS 4614,3/158 KSRTC MAIN ROAD ILKAL KARNATAKA - 587 125 IFSC CODE: SBINOO40312 REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORIZED OFFICER …RESPONDENT THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED SALE NOTICE DATED 21.03.2022, VIDE ANNEXURE-C, U/S 13(4) OF THE SARFAESI ACT, 2002 R/W RULE 8 OF THE SIE RULES, 2002 WHICH IS ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT BANK AND DECLARE THAT THE ENTIRE RECOVERY PROCEEDINGS INITIATED BY THE RESPONDENT BANK AGAINST THE SCHEDULE PROPERTY ARE ILLEGAL AND IN VIOLATION OF SARFAESI ACT, 2002. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:17812 WP No. 8189 of 2022 ORAL ORDER The present writ petition is filed seeking the following prayers: "a) To issue writ in the nature of certiorari by set side the impugned sale notice dated 21-03-2022, Vide Annexure-C, under sec 13(4) of the SARFAESI Act, 2002 read with Rule 8 of the SIE Rules, 2002 which issued by the respondent bank and declare that the entire recovery proceedings initiated by the Respondent Bank against the Schedule Property are illegal & in violation of SARFAESI Act, 2002; b) Issue an order directing the respondent to consider the OTS letter dated 27.01.2022 Vide Annexure B & Grant A moratorium period of 6 months to settle the OTS amount. c) Issue such other order or direction as may be deemed fit to grant in the circumstances of the case." 2. A Co-ordinate Bench of this Court has passed an order on 13.04.2022, which reads as under: - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:17812 WP No. 8189 of 2022 "Issue emergent notice to respond. Heard learned Counsel for the Petitioner on Interim prayer. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the patient is before this court challenging the recovery action initiated by the Respondent-Bank under the provisions of the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002. Further, she submits that the petitioner was granted One Time Settlement on 27.01.2022 as per Annexure-B and the petitioner was directed to deposit 10% of the amount stated in Annexure-B before 31.03.2022, which the petitioner could not deposit. The respondent-Bank issued sale notice dated 21.03.2022 (Annexure-C) under the provisions of the security interest (Enforcement) Rules 2002 wherein it is indicated that the petitioner is due in a sum of Rs.8,63,40,522/- (Rupees Eight Crores Sixty Three Lakhs Forty Thousand Five Hundred and Twenty Two only) as on 21.01.2022. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that to save his property, the petitioner is ready - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:17812 WP No. 8189 of 2022 to deposit substantial amount before the respondent- Bank. It is submitted that the sale is fixed on 13.04.2022 i.e. today. Taking note of the fact that the petitioner has come forward to deposit substantial amount to save his property, I deem it appropriate to stay the confirmation of sale in pursuance of Annexure-C dated 21.03.2022, subject to the petitioner depositing a sum of Rs.1.00 Crore on or before 7 29.04.2022 and another sum of Rs.1.00 Crore within 15 days thereafter, i.e., on or before 16.05.2022. Failure on the part of petitioner to deposit the amounts as stated above, the Interim granted stands rescinded." 3. Pursuant to the said order, the petitioner has paid the amount. However, it is unfortunate that, though the writ petition is of the year 2022, even till date, the process fee has not been paid and the petitioner has been enjoying the interim order. This is nothing but a pure abuse of process of law. If the petitioner is aggrieved by the said notice, he ought to have - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:17812 WP No. 8189 of 2022 approached the Tribunal and not this Court. Hence, this Court is of the view that the writ petition is not maintainable. 4. In that view of the matter, this Court is passing the following: ORDER i. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of, giving liberty to the petitioner to avail the appropriate remedy. ii. Pending IAs., if any, shall stand closed. SD/- (LALITHA KANNEGANTI) JUDGE SMC List No.: 1 Sl No.: 3