Dismissed¶36

Sri H L Narendra Babu v. Fedbank Financial Services Limited

Karnataka HC3 Jun 2026WP/23217/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Karnataka HC writ petition (GM-DRT) dismissed; SARFAESI Section 14 possession notice not challengeable by writ petition (Apex Court settled law); alternate remedy: appeal before DRT; petitioner H.L.Narendra Babu; respondent Fedbank Financial Services Limited; Articles 226 and 227; Crl.Misc.No.5821/2020 allowed 16.03.2021; Possession Notice dated 24.07.2020 (Annexure-G); amounts referenced: Rs.7 Crores (nine flats), Rs.4.58 Crores (outstanding dues).

What did the court decide?

None; the writ petition was dismissed. ¶36

Sri H L Narendra Babu Vs Fedbank Financial Services… — Banking and Recovery | Karnataka HC (2026)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2026:KHC:25978 WP No. 23217 of 2022

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 3^RD DAY OF JUNE, 2026

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI M WRIT PETITION NO. 23217 OF 2022 (GM-DRT)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

SRI. H.L.NARENDRA BABU, S/O. SRI. H.LAKSHMI NARASAPPA, AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, R/AT FLAT NO.309, BSR KOORLA RESIDENCY, KOGILU VILLAGE, YELAHANKA HOBLI, BENGALURU NORTH, BENGALURU-560064.

¶9

…PETITIONER (BY SRI. NAGENDRA KUMAR K., ADVOCATE)

¶10

AND:

¶11

FEDBANK FINANCIAL SERVICES LIMITED, CIN NO.U65910KL19959PLC008910, CORPORATE OFFICE AT KANAKIA WALL STREET, Digitally signed A-WING, 5TH FLOOR, UNIT NO.511 AND 512 by GEETHA P G ANDHERI KURLA ROAD, Location: HIGH CHAKAFA, ANDHERI (EAST), COURT OF MUMBAI-400093. KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORIZED OFFICER SENIOR MANAGER AND ALSO REG BRANCH OFFICE FEDBANK FINANCIAL SERVICES LIMITED, FEDERAL TOWERS, AUVA, ERNAKULAM, KERALA-683101. REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORIZED OFFICER SENIOR MANGER …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. FRANCIS XAVIER, ADVOCATE)

¶12

¶13

NC: 2026:KHC:25978 WP No. 23217 of 2022

¶14

HC-KAR

¶15

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

¶16

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

¶17

ORAL ORDER

¶18

Sri.Nagendra Kumar, counsel for the petitioner and Sri.Francis Xavier, counsel for the respondent appeared in person.

¶19

The writ petition is filed seeking following reliefs:

¶20

(i) Issue Writ of Certiorari or any appropriate order by quashing the impugned Possession Notice dated 24.07.2020, issued against the schedule property of the petitioner in Sl.No.20 is concerned, passed by the respondent bank, as per Annexure G, in the interest of justice and equity.

¶21

(ii) Issue Writ of Mandamus or any appropriate order by directing the respondent bank to exclude the schedule property of the petitioner in the possession notice dated 24.07.2020 as

¶22

¶23

NC: 2026:KHC:25978 WP No. 23217 of 2022

¶24

HC-KAR

¶25

per Annexure-G and direct to stop further proceedings in-pursuance of the notice, in the interest of justice and equity.

¶26

(iii) Issue Writ of Mandamus or any appropriate order by directing the respondent bank to sell the 9 flats worth of Rs.7 Crores which was already been in physical possession in the past 8 months with the respondent bank to recover the outstanding dues amount of Rs.4.58 Crores, in the interest of justice and equity.

¶27

(iv) Issue Writ of Mandamus or any appropriate order by directing the respondent bank to pay cost to the petitioner, in the interst of justice and equity.

¶28

(v) Grant such other and further reliefs as this Hon'ble Court deems fit and necessary to be grant under circumstances of the above writ petition, in the interest of justice and equity.

¶29

Counsel for the respective parties urged several

¶30

contentions. Heard the arguments and perused the papers with care.

¶31

Suffice it to note that the first respondent had filed

¶32

petition under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act in

¶33

4 - NC: 2026:KHC:25978 WP No. 23217 of 2022

¶34

HC-KAR

¶35

Crl.Misc.No.5821/2020 and the Court vide order

¶36

dated:16.03.2021 had allowed the petition. There is an alternate remedy of filing an appeal before the DRT as against the order passed under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act. The petitioner's grievance is about the issuance of the possession notice. The relief sought by the petitioner cannot be granted under writ jurisdiction. The Apex Court has settled the law in a catena of decisions that a possession notice cannot be challenged by filing a writ petition. The petition is devoid of merits. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed .

¶37

Sd/- (JYOTI M) JUDGE

¶38

SS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 32

Sri H L Narendra Babu v. Fedbank Financial Services Limited

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri H L Narendra Babu v. Fedbank Financial Services Limited

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sri. Jaffer Ali, Vs the Authorised Officer

The Management of Chinmaya Mission Hospital Vs the Deputy Labour Commissioner

Mrs. S Gayathri Vs Icici Bank Ltd.

M/S Pushpanjali Traders Vs the Authorised Officer Bank of Baroda

Mr J Anil Kumar Vs Icic Home Finance Company Ltd.

Sri. Nataraj. K Vs Central Bank of India