The writ petitioner failed to deposit the demanded amount despite a stay order. The court applied SARFAESI Act precedents, holding the bank notices valid, and dismissed the petition as devoid of merits.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:50101 WP No. 19877 of 2022
CNR: KAHC010459142022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 15TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM WRIT PETITION NO. 19877 OF 2022 (GM-DRT)
BETWEEN:
…PETITIONER
(BY SMT. KAVITHA .D, ADVOCATE)
AND:
Digitally signed by AL BHAGYA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
THE AUTHORIZED OFFICER, JAYANAGAR BRANCH, NO.238/35, 9TH MAIN, 3RD BLOCK, BANGALORE-560011. REP. BY AUTHORISED OFFICER OF BRANCH.
…RESPONDENT
(BY SMT. SUNANDA S. RATHOD, ADVOCATE FOR C/R)
THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE SEC 14 ORDER BEFORE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE IN CRL MISC NO.142/2019 PHYSICAL POSSESSION NOTICE DATED 12.07.2022 VIDE ANNEXURE-C AND THE SALE NOTICE DATED
Digitally Signed By: SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM Verified
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:50101 WP No. 19877 of 2022
CNR: KAHC010459142022
19.9.2022 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT BANK AS PER ANNEXURE-F AND G; AND ETC.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM
ORAL ORDER
The captioned petition is filed by the defaulter questioning the order of the Chief Judicial Magistrate ordering physical possession vide notice dated 12.07.2022 and the sale notice dated 19.09.2022 issued by the respondent/Bank as per Annexures- "F and G".
United Bank of India Vs. Satyavati Tandon & others
Digitally Signed By: SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM Verified
NC: 2026:KHC:50101 WP No. 19877 of 2022
HC-KAR
CNR: KAHC010459142022
(2010)8 SCC 11 has held that the action contemplated by the secured creditor under the provisions of Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (for short "SARFAESI Act") cannot be interdicted by a writ Court. The possession notice and the sale notice are in accordance with law in view of the fact that petitioner has not shown any inclination in paying off the dues legally recoverable by the respondent/Bank.
Writ petition is devoid of merits and accordingly,
stands dismissed.
Digitally Signed By: SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM Verified
(SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM) JUDGE
ALB List No.: 1 Sl No.: 35
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the secured creditor can issue physical possession and sale notices under SARFAESI Act in absence of compliance with stay order by depositing dues.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
United Bank of India Vs. Satyavati Tandon & othersApplied¶31
(2010)8 SCC 11 · Who else cites this
MRS. BHAVANI SHAMANNA
M/S UCO BANK
SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
