[Cites 5, Cited by 0]
Karnataka High Court
M/S Swathi Agencies vs The State Bank Of India on 4 February, 2026
-1-
NC: 2026:KHC-D:1559
WP No. 103798 of 2025
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD
DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI
WRIT PETITION NO.103798 OF 2025 (GM-RES)
BETWEEN:
M/S SWATHI AGENCIES
FERTILIZERS AND PESTICIDE DEALERS
NAVALI ROAD, KARATAGI, DIST. KOPPAL
BY ITS PROPRIETOR SRI. MAHESH SAJJAN
S/O. MALKAJAPPA SAJJAN,
AGE. 45 YEARS, OCC. BUSINESS,
R/O. WARD NO.1 NEAR SHARANA
BASAVESHWARA TEMPLE, KARATAGI,
TQ. KARATAGI, DIST. KOPPAL-583229.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. HANUMANTHAREDDY SAHUKAR, ADVOCATE)
Digitally signed AND:
by YASHAVANT
NARAYANKAR
1. THE STATE BANK OF INDIA
Location: HIGH
COURT OF CHIEF MANAGER
KARNATAKA RACC BRANCH, BAGODI SQUARE,
OPPOSITE SAI BABA RICE MILL,
R.G. ROAD, GANGAVATHI
DIST. KOPPAL-583227.
2. THE BRANCH MANAGER
STATE BANK OF INDIA
KARATAGI BRANCH, KARATAGI
DIST. KOPPAL-583229.
-2-
NC: 2026:KHC-D:1559
WP No. 103798 of 2025
HC-KAR
3. THE STATE BANK OF INDIA
ASSETS RECOVERY MANAGEMENT BRANCH
(40564) 2ND FLOOR, A BLOCK, BKG COMPLEX
MYSORE BANK CIRCLE, 1 AVENUE ROAD,
BENGALURU-560009, REPRESENTED BY
ITS AUTHORIZED OFFICER,
SRI. RAMA NAGAPPA MOGER
S/O. NAGAPPA MOGER,
RECOVERY BRANCH HUBBALLI,
DIST. DHARWAD.-580030.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. V.P. VADAVI, ADVOCATE)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND
227 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO A. A WRIT IN
THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI OR ANY OTHER WRIT OR ORDER
OR DIRECTION QUASHING THE NOTICE DT.01.06.2022 BEARING
NO.ADV/64181625463/39294253424/40258167424 ISSUED BY
THE RESPONDENT NO.1, AND THE ORDER DATED 29.04.2025 IN
CRL. MISC. NO.16/2025 PASSED BY THE LEARNED SENIOR
CIVIL JUDGE AND CJM, KOPPAL, PRODUCED AS ANNEXURE-A
AND C RESPECTIVELY. B. A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF
MANDAMUS OR ANY OTHER WRIT OR ORDER OR DIRECTION
DIRECTING THE RESPONDENTS TO PERMIT THE PETITIONER TO
PAY THE LOAN AMOUNT IN A ONE TIME SETTLEMENT SCHEME.
C. SUCH OTHER WRIT OR ORDER OR DIRECTION AS DEEMED
FIT UNDER THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE
INCLUDING AN ORDER FOR COST MAY KINDLY BE PASSED.
THIS WRIT PETITION, COMING ON FOR FURTHER
HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI
-3-
NC: 2026:KHC-D:1559
WP No. 103798 of 2025
HC-KAR
ORAL ORDER
The present writ petition is filed seeking the following
prayers:
" i) A writ in the nature of certiorari or any other writ
or order or direction quashing the notice
dated 1.6.2022 bearing No.
ADV/64181625463/39294253424/40258167424
issued by respondent No.1, and the order dated
29.4.2025 in Crl.Misc.No.16/2025 passed by the
learned Senior Civil Judge and CJM, Koppal produced
at Annexure-A and C respectively.
ii) A writ in the nature of mandamus or any other
writ or order or direction directing the respondents to
permit the petitioner to pay the loan amount in One
Time Settlement Scheme.
iii) Such other writ or order or direction as deemed fit
under the facts and circumstances of the case
including an order for cost may kindly be passed."
2. The facts of the case are that, the petitioner had
availed a loan of Rs.45,00,000/- from respondent No.2/Bank on
the security of the immovable property. When the petitioner
failed to pay the amount, the account was declared as LPA and
the proceedings were initiated under the SARFAESI Act. It is
further stated that notice under Section 13(2) of the SARFAESI
Act was issued on 01.06.2022. It is the case of the petitioner
that due to Covid-19 pandemic, the petitioner could not repay
NC: 2026:KHC-D:1559
HC-KAR
the loan amount. Hence, the respondents/Bank had moved the
Senior Civil Judge and CJM, Koppal under Section 14 of the
SARFAESI Act and an order was passed on 29.04.2025
appointing the Court Commissioner to take possession and hand
over the same to the respondents/Bank. Pursuant to the said
order, the Court Commissioner had issued a notice dated
30.05.2025 calling upon the petitioner to hand over the vacant
possession within seven days from the date of the notice. It is
stated that the petitioner requested the respondents/Bank to
give some time and OTS facility so as to repay the loan amount,
due to loss in the business.
3. It is the grievance of the petitioner that the
respondents/Bank did not consider the request of the petitioner
for One Time Settlement. For consideration of reasonable
request for One Time Settlement, the petitioner has come up
before this Court. However, the prayer that is sought is to quash
the order passed under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act. Learned
counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that he is ready for
One Time Settlement.
4. When the matter came up on the last occasion, this
Court had directed the respondents/Bank to get specific
NC: 2026:KHC-D:1559
HC-KAR
instructions as to whether One Time Settlement scheme is
available for considering the case of the petitioner. It is the
instruction of the learned counsel appearing for the
respondents/Bank that there is no such scheme in place and it is
submitted that they will not be able to consider the case of the
petitioner for One Time Settlement.
5. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has
placed a letter dated 08.01.2026 i.e., the Format of compromise
offer letter to be obtained from the borrower. It is stated that a
letter is given by the Bank and in that regard, an amount of
Rs.5,10,000/- has been paid by the petitioner.
6. The petitioner has come up before this Court
questioning the proceedings initiated under Section 14 of the
SARFAESI Act. The writ petition filed before this Court is not
maintainable for the reason that the petitioner has an effective
alternative remedy of approaching the Debts Recovery Tribunal.
Apart from that, this Court do not see any legal grounds. As far
as One Time Settlement is concerned, in the light of the settled
law, there cannot be any direction to the Bank to grant One Time
Settlement to the petitioner/borrower. If the Bank comes
forward to compromise with the petitioner, that is between the
NC: 2026:KHC-D:1559
HC-KAR
bank and the petitioner and they are at liberty to proceed so.
However, the present writ petition cannot be entertained.
Accordingly, this Court is passing the following:
ORDER
i) The writ petition is disposed of giving
liberty to the petitioner to avail the
appropriate remedy available to him.
ii) All I.As. in this writ petition shall stand
closed.
Sd/-
JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI
JTR
CT: UMD
List No.: 1 Sl No.: 1
