Dismissed¶48

Sri J Ashok v. the State Bank of India

SARFAESI Act – Section 14

Karnataka HC8 Jun 2026WP/16618/2026

Download

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court of Karnataka (Jyoti M, J., 08.06.2026) in W.P. No. 16618 of 2026 (GM-DRT): writ petition by J. Ashok and Gani Mohammed Ali against State Bank of India (Stressed Assets Recovery Branch) and others, challenging the bank's possession notice dated 27.05.2026 issued pursuant to the Magistrate's Section 14 SARFAESI Act order dated 26.12.2024 (appeal in S.A.No.358/2026), dismissed — possession notice cannot be challenged in writ jurisdiction.

What did the court decide?

The relief sought by the petitioners (quashing of the possession notice) cannot be granted under writ jurisdiction. ¶42

Sri J Ashok Vs the State Bank of India — Banking and Recovery | Karnataka HC (2026)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2026:KHC:27104 WP No. 16618 of 2026

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 8^TH DAY OF JUNE, 2026

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI M WRIT PETITION NO. 16618 OF 2026 (GM-DRT)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

SRI. J.ASHOK, S/O. JANAKIRAMAN, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, R/AT NO.7, 1ST FLOOR, 8TH CROSS, 8TH MAIN, BRINDAVAN NAGAR, MATHIKERE, BENGALURU-560 054.

¶9

SRI. GANI MOHAMMED ALI, S/O. A.MOHAMMED ALI, AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, R/AT NO.1377C, 8TH CROSS, 3RD MAIN, DOLLARS COLONY, RMV II STAGE, BENGALURU-560 094.

¶10

…PETITIONERS

¶11

Digitally signed by GEETHA P G Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶12

(BY SRI. NAGARAJA K.R., ADVOCATE FOR SRI. V.VISWANATH SETTY, ADVOCATE)

¶13

AND:

¶14

THE STATE BANK OF INDIA, STRESSED ASSETS RECOVERY BRANCH, 11/90, III FLOOR, NEAR OLD SHIVAJI THEATRE, J.C.ROAD, BENGALURU-560 002. REP. BY ITS AUTHORIZED OFFICER AND CHIEF MANAGER.

¶15

MR. RIZWAN AMEER, S/O. M.AMEER MOHAMAD,

¶16

2 - NC: 2026:KHC:27104 WP No. 16618 of 2026

¶17

HC-KAR

¶18

MAJOR, R/AT 137/C, 8TH CROSS, 3RD MAIN, DOLLARS COLONY, RAJA MAHAL VILAS, II STAGE, BENGALURU-560 094 AND ALSO AT FLAT NO.005, ROYAL CLASSY, 10TH MAIN, 9TH CROSS, MATHIKERE, BENGALURU-560 054.

¶19

MR. SYED HUSSAIN, S/O. SYED IMAM, MAJOR, R/AT 'ASHRA', NO.8, 1ST FLOOR, 8TH MAIN, 8TH CROSS, BINDAVAN NAGAR, MATHIKERE, BENGALURU-560 054. AND ALSO AT TIME PALACE, NO.63, HMT MAIN ROAD, MATHIKERE, BENGALURU-560 054.

¶20

SMT. AYESHA SIDDIQUE, W/O. SYED HUSSAIN, MAJOR, R/AT 'ASHRA', NO.8, 1ST FLOOR, 8TH MAIN, 8TH CROSS, BINDAVAN NAGAR, MATHIKERE, BENGALURU-560 054. AND ALSO AT - NO.5, PID NO.20245-5, 1ST CROSS, PIPE LINE ROAD, MES ROAD, BENGALURU MAHANAGARA PALIKE, WARD NO.2, YESHWANTHPUR, BENGALURU-560 022.

¶21

…RESPONDENTS

¶22

(BY SMT. DIVYA PURANDAR, ADVOCATE FOR C/R1)

¶23

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, SEEKING CERTAIN RELIEFS.

¶24

¶25

NC: 2026:KHC:27104 WP No. 16618 of 2026

¶26

HC-KAR

¶27

THIS WRIT PETITION IS LISTED FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, AN ORDER IS MADE AS UNDER:

¶28

ORAL ORDER

¶29

Sri.Nagaraja.K.R, counsel on behalf of Sri.V.Viswanath Setty., for the petitioners and Smt.Divya Purandar., counsel for caveator/ respondent No.1 appeared in person.

¶30

The petition is listed today for preliminary hearing, with the consent, it is heard.

¶31

The writ petition is filed seeking following reliefs:

¶32

(a) Issue a Writ of Certiorari quashing the notice dated:27.05.2026 (Annexure-B) issued by the respondent No.1 Bank directing the respondents 2 and 3 to vacate and hand over vacant possession of the schedule property and failure on their part to take possession of the same by the respondent No.1 bank form the respondent No.2 and 3, the respondent No.1 bank can take action through the assistance of Law Enforcement Officials as per Section 14 of the Act, by allowing the above writ petition.

¶33

¶34

NC: 2026:KHC:27104 WP No. 16618 of 2026

¶35

HC-KAR

¶36

(b) To grant such other relief/s as this Hon'ble Court deems fit in the circumstances of the case, in the interest of justice and equity.

¶37

Counsel for the petitioners and respondent No.1 urged several contentions.

¶38

Counsel for respondent No.1 submits that a memo has been filed and the same may be placed on record. Counsel further submits that Section 14 order has been passed and an appeal is filed in S.A.No.358/2026. Counsel, therefore, submits that the writ petition is not maintainable and the same may be dismissed.

¶39

Heard the arguments and perused the papers with

¶40

care and the memo is placed on record.

¶41

Suffice it to note that vide order dated:26.12.2024

¶42

the Magistrate has passed the order under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act and an appeal has been filed. Pursuant to order, the possession notice is issued and the same is challenged in this writ petition. The petitioners' grievance is about the issuance of the possession notice. The relief sought by the petitioners cannot be granted under writ jurisdiction. The Apex

¶43

¶44

NC: 2026:KHC:27104 WP No. 16618 of 2026

¶45

HC-KAR

¶46

Court has settled the law in a catena of decisions that a

¶47

possession notice cannot be challenged by filing a writ petition. The petition is devoid of merits. Accordingly, the writ petition is

¶48

dismissed .

¶49