Mrs Latha Prasad Vs Bharath Co. Operative Bank… — Banking and Recovery | Karnataka HC (2026)

Mrs Latha Prasad Vs Bharath Co. Operative Bank… — Banking and Recovery | Karnataka HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

No relief granted; liberty reserved to the petitioners to challenge the impugned order and notice before the appropriate forum, if so advised.

Issue for consideration

Whether the writ petition challenging the order dated 13.12.2023 in Crl.Misc.No.409/2023 and the possession notice dated 07.02.2024 is maintainable, given that the impugned order and notice are appealable under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002.

Court's answer

The writ petition is not maintainable because the impugned order and notice are appealable under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002, and the petitioner filed the writ petition without exhausting the equally efficacious remedy, in view of the proposition of law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Rikhab Chand Jain Vs. Union of India and Others.

Ratio / Principle

The writ petition is dismissed, reserving liberty to the petitioners to challenge the impugned order and notice before the appropriate forum, if so advised.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India by Mrs Latha Prasad seeking to quash the order dated 13.12.2023 passed in Crl.Misc.No.409/2023 by the Principal Senior Civil Judge and CJM, Mangalore, Dakshina Kannada (Annexure-A) and consequently the possession notice dated 07.02.2024 issued by Bharath Co Operative Bank (Mumbai) Ltd (Annexure-A1): dismissed. Held, the impugned order and notice are appealable under the provisions of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002; the petitioner, without exhausting the equally efficacious remedy, could not maintain the writ petition, in view of the proposition of law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Rikhab Chand Jain Vs. Union of India and Others (2025 SCC OnLine SC 2510). Liberty reserved to the petitioners to challenge the impugned order and notice before the appropriate forum, if so advised. Pending application(s), if any, stand disposed of accordingly.

1 -

NC: 2026:KHC:6696 WP No. 4884 of 2024

HC-KAR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 3^RD DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S.KINAGI

WRIT PETITION NO. 4884 OF 2024 (GM-DRT)

BETWEEN:

Digitally signed by SUNITHA K S Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

MRS LATHA PRASAD W/O B. RAMPRASAD, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, R/AT FLAT NO.S4, STANPARK APARTMENT, VALENCIA PARK VIEW ROAD, KANKANADI, MANGALORE, DAKSHINA KANNADA -575002

(BY SRI. RAKSHITH KUMAR., ADVOCATE)

AND:

…PETITIONER

BHARATH CO OPERATIVE BANK (MUMBAI) LTD REP. BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER, HAVING ITS OFFICE AT VEENU SKY PLAZA, MOODABIDRI, KARKALA ROAD,

2 - NC: 2026:KHC:6696 WP No. 4884 of 2024

HC-KAR

MOODABIDRI, DAKSHINA KANNADA-574227 REGISTERED UNDER CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY ACT 1957

MR. BOLAR RAM PRASAD S/O LATE H.S. POOJARY, AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS, R/AT FLAT NO.S4, STANPARK APARTMENT, VALENCIA PARK VIEW ROAD, KANKANADI, MANGALORE, DAKSHINA KANNADA-575002

…RESPONDENTS

[BY SRI. H.R. SUNIL KUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR C/R1 IN (CP 3727/24)]

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 13/12/2023 PASSED IN CRL. MISC. NO. 409/2023 PENDING BEFORE THE PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND CJM, MANGALORE, DAKSHINA KANNADA VIDE ANNEXURE-A AND CONSEQUENTLY QUASH THE POSSESSION NOTICE DATED 07/02/2024 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT BANK IN REF. NO. BCB/HAM/RECOVERY AND LEGAL/ 624/2024 VIDE ABNNEXURE-A1.

3 - NC: 2026:KHC:6696 WP No. 4884 of 2024

HC-KAR

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S.KINAGI

ORAL ORDER

The petitioner, aggrieved by the order dated 13.12.2023 passed in Crl.Misc.No.409/2023 by the learned Principal Senior Civil Judge and CJM, Mangalore, Dakshina Kannada vide Annexure-A, and also possession notice dated 07.02.2024 issued by the respondent-Bank vide Annexure-A1, filed this petition.

The impugned order and notice is an appealable order under the provisions of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002. The petitioner, without exhausting the equal efficacious remedy, filed this writ petition. The writ petition is not maintainable in view of the proposition of law laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the

case of Rikhab Chand Jain Vs. Union of India and

4 -

NC: 2026:KHC:6696 WP No. 4884 of 2024

HC-KAR

Others¹ . Hence, I do not find any grounds to entertain the

writ petition.

Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed

reserving a liberty to the petitioners to challenge the impugned order and notice before the appropriate forum, if so advised.

Pending application(s), if any, shall stand

disposed of accordingly.

Sd/(ASHOK S.KINAGI) JUDGE

PA

CT:KHV List No.: 1 Sl No.: 25

1 2025 SCC OnLine SC 2510