Dismissed¶¶44

M/S Prestige Service Centre v. M/S Union Bank of India

Karnataka HC9 Jun 2026WP/34036/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Karnataka HC (NC: 2026:KHC:27519), WP No. 34036 of 2024 (GM-DRT), decided 09.06.2026 by Justice Jyoti M — DISMISSED. Challenge by Prestige Service Centre and directors Chandrakala and Padmanabha to the S.14 SARFAESI Act, 2002 commissioner-warrant order dated 05.11.2024 of the Prl. Senior Civil Judge and CJM, Mangalore in Crl.Misc.No.288/2024 (Union Bank of India, Padavu Maroli Branch); writ held non-maintainable on account of the alternate remedy of appeal before the DRT; interim orders discharged. No precedents discussed.

What did the court decide?

As against the impugned order (the Section 14 SARFAESI commissioner-warrant order in Crl.Misc.No.288/2024) there is an alternate remedy of filing an appeal before the DRT; the writ petition is therefore devoid of merits. ¶¶43

M/S Prestige Service Centre Vs M/S Union Bank of India — Banking and Recovery | Karnataka HC (2026)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2026:KHC:27519 WP No. 34036 of 2024

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 9^TH DAY OF JUNE, 2026

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI M

¶7

WRIT PETITION NO. 34036 OF 2024 (GM-DRT)

¶8

BETWEEN:

¶9

M/S. PRESTIGE SERVICE CENTRE OFFICE LOCATED AT D.NO.12/2/246 FIELD SREET, DONGAREKE, NEAR MAHAMAI TEMPLE, MANGALORE-575001. REPRESENTED BY DIRECTORS CHANDRAKALA AND PADMANABHA.

¶10

MRS. CHANDRAKALA, W/O. PADMANABHA, AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS, R/O. D.NO.12/2/246/2, FIELD STREET, DONGAKERE MAHAMAI TEMPLE, CAR STREET, MANGALORE-575001.

¶11

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

¶12

MR. PADMANABHA, S/O. K.K.LAXMAN, AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS, R/O. D.NO.12/2/246/2, FIELD STREET, DONGAKERE MAHAMAI TEMPLE, CAR STREET, MANGALORE-575001.

¶13

…PETITIONERS

¶14

(BY SRI. GIRISH M.PATIL, ADVOCATE)

¶15

AND:

¶16

M/S. UNION BANK OF INDIA, PADAVU MAROLI BRANCH,

¶17

2 - NC: 2026:KHC:27519 WP No. 34036 of 2024

¶18

HC-KAR

¶19

RAMAKRISHNA COMPLEX, KULASHEKAR-KAIKAMBA, DAKSHINA KANNADA-575005. REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORIZED OFFICER.

¶20

…RESPONDENT

¶21

(BY SMT. DIVYA PURANDAR, ADVOCATE)

¶22

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

¶23

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

¶24

ORAL ORDER

¶25

The petition is filed seeking following reliefs:

¶26

1. Issue a Writ of Certiorari or any other appropriate Writ or Order as per Annexure - 'A' and consequently to Quash the Order dated 05/11/2024 as issued by the Hon'ble Prl. Senior Civil Judge and CJM, Mangalore in Crl.Misc.No.288/2024 U/s. 14 of The SARFAESI Act, 2002 directing the Court Commissioner and Jurisdictional Police to take Physical Possession of the Schedule Properties of Petitioners and thereafter to forward the seized secured assets and documents to the Respondent - Bank.

¶27

2. Issue a Writ of Mandamus and consequently direct the Respondent - Bank that if in the event vacating the Schedule Properties is already completed by the Respondent - Bank as per Vacating Notice dated 04/12/2024 i.e. Annexure - 'B' as issued by the

¶28

¶29

NC: 2026:KHC:27519 WP No. 34036 of 2024

¶30

HC-KAR

¶31

Respondent - Bank by the time this case reaches the order stage, then to return the physical possession of both the Schedule Properties to the Petitioners herein.

¶32

3. Pass any other order which this Hon'ble Court deems fit in the interest of justice.

¶33

Counsel for the respective parties urged several

¶34

contentions.

¶35

Counsel for the respondent submits that the Bank has filed petition under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act in Crl.Misc.No.288/2024 and the Court vide order

¶36

dated:05.11.2024 has issued commissioner warrant. Counsel, further, submits that the said order cannot be questioned by filing a writ petition, as there is an alternate remedy of filing an appeal before the DRT. Counsel, therefore, submits that the writ petition is not maintainable and the same may be dismissed.

¶37

Heard the arguments and perused the papers with

¶38

care.

¶39

Suffice it to note that the respondent has filed petition under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act in

¶40

4 - NC: 2026:KHC:27519 WP No. 34036 of 2024

¶41

HC-KAR

¶42

Crl.Misc.No.288/2024 and the Court vide order

¶43

dated:05.11.2024 has issued commissioner warrant. As against the impugned order, there is an alternate remedy of filing an appeal before the DRT. The petition is devoid of merits. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed .

¶44

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

¶45

Sd/(JYOTI M) JUDGE

¶46

MRP

¶47

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 60

M/S Prestige Service Centre v. M/S Union Bank of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S Prestige Service Centre v. M/S Union Bank of India

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

Mrs Padmaja S Vs M/S Canara Bank

Sri.N. Narasimha Swamy Vs the Authorized Officer

Mr. Misbha Uddin Naser Vs J C Flowers Asset Reconstruction Private Limited

Vanishree Vs Authorised Officer and Chief Manager

The Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner Vs M/S Megha Fruit Processing Pvt. Ltd.

Vanishree Vs Authorized Officer and Chief Manager