Dismissed¶43

Sanjay. K v. Bank of Maharashtra

Karnataka HC15 Jun 2026WP/17572/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Karnataka HC (Jyoti M, J.) dismissed borrower Sanjay K.'s writ petition challenging Bank of Maharashtra's SARFAESI e-auction sale notice dated 30.05.2026: sale notices cannot be challenged via writ petition under Article 226; remedy lies before the Tribunal constituted to adjudicate such disputes. Keywords: SARFAESI Act 2002; Security Interest (Enforcement) Rules 2002, proviso to Rule 8(6) and Rule 9(1); e-auction sale notice; writ petition maintainability; alternative remedy before Tribunal.

What did the court decide?

The relief sought by the petitioner against the SARFAESI sale notice cannot be granted under writ jurisdiction. ¶37

Sanjay. K Vs Bank of Maharashtra — Banking and Recovery | Karnataka HC (2026)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2026:KHC:28816 WP No. 17572 of 2026

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶5

DATED THIS THE 15^TH DAY OF JUNE, 2026

¶6

BEFORE

¶7

THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI M WRIT PETITION NO. 17572 OF 2026 (GM-DRT)

¶8

BETWEEN:

¶9

SANJAY K., S/O. S.KARUPPAN, AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS, R/AT NO.14 AND 15, KATHA NO.36/1, BEERESHWARA NAGAR, CHUNCHAGATTA, UTHARALLI HOBLI, BENGALURU-560078.

¶10

NOW AT NO.173, 8TH CROSS, DRTC. M RAYAN ROAD, BHAKSHI GARDEN CHIKPET, BENGALURU-560053.

¶11

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

¶12

(BY SRI. KARUMBAIAH T.A., ADVOCATE)

¶13

AND:

¶14

…PETITIONER

¶15

BANK OF MAHARASHTRA, J.P.NAGAR BRANCH, J.P.NAGAR, BENGALURU-560018. REPRESENTED BY THE BANK MANAGER.

¶16

THE AUTHORIZED OFFICER AND CHIEF MANAGER, BANK OF MAHARASHTRA, ASSET RECOVERY BRANCH, NO.485/A, 22ND CROSS, 3RD BLOCK,

¶17

2 - NC: 2026:KHC:28816 WP No. 17572 of 2026

¶18

HC-KAR

¶19

OPP: TO NMKRV COLLEGE FOR WOMEN, JAYANAGAR, BENGALURU-560 011.

¶20

LEELARAJ P., PROPRIETOR M/S. LEELARAJ ENTERPRISES, NO.897/B, 80 FEET ROAD, 6TH BLOCK, KORAMANGALA, BENGALURU-560047.

¶21

…RESPONDENTS

¶22

(BY SMT. DIVYA PURANDAR, ADVOCATE FOR R1 AND R2)

¶23

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

¶24

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

¶25

ORAL ORDER

¶26

Sri.T.A.Karumbaiah, counsel for the petitioner and Smt.Divya Purandar, counsel for respondent Nos.1 and 2 appeared in person.

¶27

This petition is filed seeking following reliefs:

¶28

(i) Issue a writ of certiorari to quash AnnexureC the auction sale notice dated 30.05.2026 bearing No.AX27/Sarfaesi/Sale Notice/202627 issued by the 2^nd respondent;

¶29

(ii) Issue a writ of mandamus directing respondents 1 and to deliver possession of

¶30

¶31

NC: 2026:KHC:28816 WP No. 17572 of 2026

¶32

HC-KAR

¶33

the schedule property to the petitioner within a specified period;

¶34

(iii) Issue a writ of mandamus directing respondents 1 and 2 to consider the case of the petitioner for regularization of the loan account and to continue to pay the EMI in future.

¶35

(iv) Issue any other writ, order or direction as this Hon'ble Court deems fit in the circumstances of the case.

¶36

Counsel for the respective parties urged several contentions. Heard the arguments and perused the papers with care.

¶37

The authorized officer of the Bank of Maharashtra has issued e-auction sale notice for the sale of immovable assets under SARFAESI Act, 2002 r/w proviso to Rule 8(6) and 9(1) of Security Interest (Enforcement) Rules, 2002 on 30.05.2026. The petitioner's grievance is about the issuance of the sale notice issued under SARFAESI Act, 2002. The relief sought by the petitioner cannot be granted under writ jurisdiction. The Apex Court has settled the law in a catena of

¶38

¶39

NC: 2026:KHC:28816 WP No. 17572 of 2026

¶40

HC-KAR

¶41

decisions that a sale notice cannot be challenged by filing a writ petition.

¶42

The litigants are not remediless, as the Tribunal has been established specifically to adjudicate the lis . The petition is devoid of merits. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed .

¶43

Because of dismissal the Writ Petition, interim order granted if any stands discharged and pending interlocutory applications if any are disposed of.

¶44

SD/(JYOTI M) JUDGE

¶45

¶46

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 9

Sanjay. K v. Bank of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sanjay. K v. Bank of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sri Ayub Ali Vs the Canara Bank

Mrs. Giridhar Rao Anitha Vs the Authorised Officer

Sri Hanumanthegowda Vs Special Land Acquisition Officer

Lakshmi N Vs the Reserve Bank of India

M/S Priya Products Vs the Authorized Officer Union Bank of India.

Smt. T. Nagamma Vs Central Silk Board