Dismissed¶34

Sri.N. Narasimha Swamy v. the Authorized Officer

Karnataka HC8 Jun 2026WP/3892/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition dismissed; High Court of Karnataka; Articles 226 and 227 Constitution of India; SARFAESI Act measures; possession notice / Sale Notice dated 19.01.2024 cannot be challenged by filing writ petition; South Indian Bank Ltd.; Authorized Officer; SA.No.317/2023 Debt Recovery Tribunal-I; one time settlement proposal; mandamus refused; WP No. 3892 of 2024 (GM-DRT); Justice Jyoti M; decided 08-06-2026.

What did the court decide?

This Court held that the relief sought by the petitioner cannot be granted under writ jurisdiction; relying on the settled law of the Apex Court in a catena of decisions, a possession notice cannot be challenged by filing a writ petition. ¶34

Sri.N. Narasimha Swamy Vs the Authorized Officer — Banking and Recovery | Karnataka HC (2026)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2026:KHC:27102 WP No. 3892 of 2024

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶5

DATED THIS THE 8^TH DAY OF JUNE, 2026

¶6

BEFORE

¶7

THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI M WRIT PETITION NO. 3892 OF 2024 (GM-DRT)

¶8

BETWEEN:

¶9

SRI. N.NARASIMHA SWAMY, D/O. LATE NARASIMHAIAH AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.10/1, 5th MAIN ROAD, 2nd B CROSS, SULTHANPALYA, R.T.NAGAR, BENGALURU-560 032.

¶10

…PETITIONER

¶11

(BY SRI. VINAY KUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. V.B.RAVISHANKER, ADVOCATE)

¶12

AND:

¶13

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

¶14

THE AUTHORIZED OFFICER, SOUTH INDIAN BANK LTD., HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT SIB HOUSE, T.B.ROAD, MISSION QUARTERS, THRISSUR, KERALA-680001. HAVING ITS REGIONAL OFFICE AT BENGALURU SIB ARCADE, NO.61, WHEELERS ROAD, COX TOWN, REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORIZED OFFICER MR. JERAL JAMES UZHUVATHU S/O JAMES UZHUVATHU

¶15

…RESPONDENT

¶16

(BY SRI. NARAYAN SHENOY, ADVOCATE FOR C/R)

¶17

¶18

NC: 2026:KHC:27102 WP No. 3892 of 2024

¶19

HC-KAR

¶20

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

¶21

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

¶22

ORAL ORDER

¶23

Sri.Vinay Kumar, counsel on behalf of

¶24

Sri.V.B.Ravishankar, for the petitioner and Sri.Narayan Shenoy, counsel for caveator/ respondent have appeared in person.

¶25

The writ petition is filed seeking following reliefs:

¶26

(a) Issue a writ in the nature of certiorari and to quash or the measures initiated under provisions of SARFAESI Act; at Annexure-A.

¶27

(b) Issue a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent bank to accept the one time settlement proposal vide Annexure-A.

¶28

(c) Issue a writ in the nature of certiorari and quash the Sale Notice dated 19.01.2024 published in Indian Express Daily Kannada newspaper dated 19.01.2024 vide Annexure-A as the same is issued during pendency of application filed before the Debt Recovery Tribunal in SA.No.317/2023 on the file of Debt Recovery Tribunal-I.

¶29

¶30

NC: 2026:KHC:27102 WP No. 3892 of 2024

¶31

HC-KAR

¶32

(d) To grant such other relief as the Hon'ble Court deems fit to grant in the facts and circumstances of the case.

¶33

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

¶34

The petitioner's grievance is about the issuance of the Sale notice. The relief sought by the petitioners 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 .

¶35

Sd/(JYOTI M) JUDGE

¶36

¶37

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 44

Sri.N. Narasimha Swamy v. the Authorized Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri.N. Narasimha Swamy v. the Authorized Officer

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

Hareesha K M, Vs Karnataka Bank Ltd.

Smt L Manjula Vs Sri. N. Sathish.

U Vasulingappa Vs State Bank of India

Vijaya Education Institute Trust Vs Controlling Authority

Sri S Kumar Vs M/S Gemini Distilleries

Sri J Ashok Vs the State Bank of India