Disposed

Smt Meghana W/O Sushant Patait v. Karnataka Bank Ltd.

Karnataka HC18 Feb 2026WP/101198/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Purchasers of a flat mortgaged by its builder challenged their eviction following a Magistrate's Section 14 SARFAESI order, seeking restoration of possession and compensation. The High Court held the writ petition was not maintainable since the bank was a secured creditor with first charge, and disposed of it granting liberty to seek remedies before the Debts Recovery Tribunal.

What did the court decide?

Liberty granted to petitioners to avail appropriate remedy before the Debts Recovery Tribunal; all interlocutory applications closed.

Smt Meghana W/O Sushant Patait Vs Karnataka Bank Ltd. — Banking and Recovery | Karnataka HC (2026)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2026:KHC-D:2496 WP No. 101198 of 2026

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD

¶5

DATED THIS THE 18^TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026

¶6

BEFORE

¶7

THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI

¶8

WRIT PETITION NO. 101198 OF 2026 (GM-RES)

¶9

BETWEEN:

¶10

SMT. MEGHANA W/O SUSHANT PATAIT, AGE. 33 YEARS, OCC. HOMEMAKER, RESIDENT OF FLAT NO.301, THIRD FLOOR, SHRI GURU ANUGRAH, CTS NO.173/1A, TASHILDAR GALLI, BELAGAVI-590001.

¶11

SHRI. SUSHANT S/O RAMESH PATAIT, AGE. 35 YEARS, OCC. SERVICE, RESIDENT OF FLAT NO.301, THIRD FLOOR, SHRI GURU ANUGRAH, CTS NO.173/1A, TASHILDAR GALLI, BELAGAVI-590001.

¶12

Digitally signed by YASHAVANT NARAYANKAR Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶13

(BY SRI. SHRIPRASAD JOSHI, ADV. FOR SRI. RAVIRAJ C PATIL, ADV.)

¶14

…PETITIONERS

¶15

AND:

¶16

KARNATAKA BANK LTD, ASSET RECOVERY MANAGEMENT BRANCH, 2^ND FLOOR, KARNATAKA BANK BUILDING, CTS 122/108, PB NO.499, NEW COTTON MARKET, HUBBALLI-580029, AND HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT, KARNATAKA BANK LTD., H.O,.

¶17

2 - NC: 2026:KHC-D:2496 WP No. 101198 of 2026

¶18

HC-KAR

¶19

P.B.NO.599 MAHAVEERA CIRCLE, KANAKNADY MANGALURU-575002, AND ITS BRANCH OFFICE AT, BELAGAVI MAIN BRANCH, CHANDRABHAGA NO.1290/A, GROUND FLOOR, RAMLINGKHIND GALLI, BELAGAVI-590001.

¶20

SHRI. SUNIL S/O BHUPAL SHETTY, AGE. 51 YEARS, OCC. BUSINESS, RESIDENT OF 370/2, SHETTY PLAZA, RAMLINGKHIND GALLI, BELAGAVI-590001.

¶21

…RESPONDENTS

¶22

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO, A. ISSUE A WRIT OF MANDAMUS OR ANY ORDER IN THE FORM OF WRIT TO RESTORE THE POSSESSION OF THE PROPERTY OF THE PETITIONERS IN FLAT NO. 301 BEARING E-ASTHI NO. 29-2-1273-10B-1 MEASURING SUPER BUILTUP AREA 1126 SQ.FT. OUT OF PID NO. 145602 LOCATED ON THE THIRD FLOOR OF BUILDING KNOW AS SHRI GURU ANUGRAH CONSTRUCTED BY THE RESPONDENT NO. 2 IN CTS NO. 173/1A AT TASHILDAR GALLI, BELAGAVI TO THE PETITIONERS AS PER ANNEXURE-B; B. ISSUE A WRIT OF MANDAMUS ON RESPONDENT NO. 2 TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENT NO. 2 TO COMPENSATE THE PETITIONERS IN CASE OF ANY EQUITABLE MEASURES TAKEN BY THE PETITIONERS; C. PASS SUCH OTHER WRIT OR ORDER OR DIRECTION AS DEEMED FIT IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.

¶23

3 - NC: 2026:KHC-D:2496 WP No. 101198 of 2026

¶24

HC-KAR

¶25

THIS WRIT PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI

¶26

ORAL ORDER

¶27

The present writ petition is filed seeking the following

¶28

prayer:

¶29

“a. Issue a writ of mandamus or any order in the form of writ to restore the possession of the property of the petitioners in flat no. 301 bearing E-asthi no. 29-2-1273-10B-1 measuring super builtup area 1126 sq.ft. out of PID no. 145602 located on the third floor of building know as Shri Guru Anugrah constructed by the respondent no. 2 in CTS no. 173/1a at Tashildar Galli, Belagavi to the petitioners as per ANNEXURE-B;

¶30

b. Issue a writ of mandamus on respondent no. 2 to direct the respondent no. 2 to compensate the petitioners in case of any equitable measures taken by the petitioners;

¶31

c. Pass such other writ or order or direction as deemed fit in the interest of justice and equity.”

¶32

The petitioners are aggrieved by the order dated 09.01.2026 passed in Criminal Miscellaneous No.236/2025 where the order is passed by the Magistrate under Section 14 of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (for short, ‘SARFAESI Act’).

¶33

¶34

NC: 2026:KHC-D:2496 WP No. 101198 of 2026

¶35

HC-KAR

¶36

The facts of the case are that, according to the petitioners, they have purchased the property from respondent No.2 i.e. Flat No.301 measuring super built up area of 1126 sq.ft. located on the third floor of the building known as the Guru Anugrah constructed by respondent No.2 by way of a registered sale deed. The petitioners have availed the loan for the purchase of the property. The respondent No.2 has availed the loan from respondent/Bank for construction of the property which includes the property of the petitioners and the respondent/Bank has initiated the proceedings under the SARFAESI Act. It is the grievance of the petitioners that, when the property is sold to the petitioners by respondent No.2 and respondent No.2 has undertaken to indemnify the petitioners, now under the provisions of the SARFAESI Act, without notice to the petitioners, the respondent No.1 cannot initiate the proceedings. As such, they have filed this writ petition before this Court seeking a direction to the respondents to forthwith restore the possession of the property and also issue a mandamus to respondent No.2 to compensate the petitioners in case of any equitable measures taken by the petitioners.

¶37

5 - NC: 2026:KHC-D:2496 WP No. 101198 of 2026

¶38

HC-KAR

¶39

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that, the petitioners being the owners of the property, without due process of law, they have been evicted from the property. Hence, they are entitled for re-delivery of the possession of the property.

¶40

Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, perused the material on record. The writ petition as filed and the reliefs as sought before this Court are not at all maintainable. It is also an admitted fact that, respondent No.2 has mortgaged the properties which are sold to the petitioners to respondent/Bank. The respondent/Bank has declared the loan account as NPA, and had initiated the proceedings under the SARFAESI Act. Bank had approached the Magistrate under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act and the Magistrate has passed the order. Though there are inter se disputes between the petitioners and respondent No.2, respondent No.1 being a secured creditor, as the mortgage is in their favour as a first charge, they are always at liberty to initiate the proceedings. If the petitioners are aggrieved by any of the action that is taken by respondent/Bank or by an order passed under Section 14 of

¶41

¶42

NC: 2026:KHC-D:2496 WP No. 101198 of 2026

¶43

HC-KAR

¶44

the SARFAESI Act he is at liberty to avail the appropriate remedy but he can not maintain this writ petition. Accordingly this Court is passing the following:

¶45

ORDER

¶46

(i) Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of giving liberty to the petitioners to avail appropriate remedy before the Debts Recovery Tribunal.

¶47

(ii) All I.As. in this writ petition shall stand closed.

¶48

Sd/JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI

¶49

RH CT:CNB List No.: 1 Sl No.: 21

Smt Meghana W/O Sushant Patait v. Karnataka Bank Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt Meghana W/O Sushant Patait v. Karnataka Bank Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

The Deputy Director, Vs the State of Karnataka

Smt. Gangawwa Sadashiv Jeeragal D/O Late Sadashiv Jeergal and W/O Kalappa Jadar Vs Basappa S/O Kadappa Jeeragal

Vittal Vs the Secretary

Mr Anand Joteppa Hosur Vs Smt. Pushpa W/O Joteppa Hosur

Sri Pugazhendi K S/O Kannapan Vs the State of Karnataka

Smt Hema W/O Basavaraj Dalwai Vs State of Karnataka