Karnataka High Court
Mr. A. Mohammed Altaf vs Asset Recovery Management on 16 October, 2025
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC:41195
WP No. 30557 of 2025
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2025
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI
WRIT PETITION NO. 30557 OF 2025 (GM-DRT)
BETWEEN:
1. MR. A. MOHAMMED ALTAF
S/O MOHAMMED AMEER,
AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS,
R/AT NO.65, 39TH A MAIN ROAD,
4TH CROSS, K.A.S.OFFICERS LAYOUT,
2ND STAGE, BTM LAYOUT,
BANGALORE -560 076
2. MR. MOHAMMED SIDDIQ,
S/O A MOHAMMED ALTAF,
AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS,
Digitally signed
by MEGHA R/AT NO.65, 39TH A MAIN ROAD,
MOHAN
Location: HIGH
COURT OF 4TH CROSS, K A S OFFICERS LAYOUT,
KARNATAKA
2ND STAGE, BTM LAYOUT,
BANGALORE -560 076
...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI. SHIVA SHANKAR C., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. ASSET RECOVERY MANAGEMENT
CANARA BANK (ARM) II BRANCH
2ND FLOOR, CIRCLE OFFICE,
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC:41195
WP No. 30557 of 2025
HC-KAR
SPENCER TOWERS, NO.86, M.G.ROAD,
BANGALORE- 560 001
REP. BY ITS MANAGER
2. M/S PRETIGE POULTRY FARM AND FEEDS
REGISTERED OFFICE
UGLA, NAGEPALLI
MALLASANDRA VILLAGE,
DEVARAGUDIPALLI MANDAL,
KASABA HOBLI, BEGAPALLIN TALUK,
CHIKKABALLAPUR DISTRICT -561 297
REP. BY ITS BY PROPRIETOR
3. MR. VIKAR KHADEER AHMED
S/O BASHEER AHMRD @ MUNEER AHMED
AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS,
NO.786, PATEL G KULLAPPA ROAD,
R.S.PALYA, KAMMANNAHALLI MAIN ROAD,
CROSS, M.S.NAGAR POST,
BANGAOLROE -560 033
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI.C.VINAYSWAMYA, ADVOCATE FOR C/R1)
THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF
THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE SALE
NOTICE DATED 10.09.2025 ISSUED BY THE R1 VIDE
ANNEXURE-F BEARING NO. ARM 11/SN/01/2025-26.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY,
ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
-3-
NC: 2025:KHC:41195
WP No. 30557 of 2025
HC-KAR
CORAM: HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI
ORAL ORDER
The present writ petition is files seeking the following relief:
a) Issue a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction quashing the sale notice dated 10.09.2025 issued by the respondent No.1 vide Annexure-F
b) Grant such other relief or consequential relief as this court deems fit in the facts and circumstances of the case, in the interest of justice and equity.
2. The petitioners herein are the agreement holder with the borrower-wife of respondent No.3. It is the case of the petitioner that he has invested an amount of Rs.3,50,00,000/- in the civil works and other works and labourers towards the purchase of feed. The petitioners have entered into an agreement of sale dated 23.09.2019 with the respondent No.3 to purchase the schedule premises for a sum of Rs.4.00 crores. On the date of entering into the agreement, the respondent No.3 has acknowledged the receipt for Rs.2.00 crores which was investment for respondent No.3 business and agreed to execute the sale deed within 12 months. As respondent No.3 has failed to execute the sale deed, the petitioners have filed -4- NC: 2025:KHC:41195 WP No. 30557 of 2025 HC-KAR OS.No.199/2020 on the file of Addl. Senior Civil Judge, Bagepalli and the court had granted an interim order of status- quo in respect of the schedule properties. Later, as the petitioners had failed to pursue the case, the suit came to be dismissed on 01.04.2022 for non-prosecution.
3. Thereafter they filed Misc.No.34/2022 on the file of Prl. District & Sessions Judge, Chikkaballapur to set-aside the order dated 01.04.2022 and restore the original suit OS.No.199/2020. It is submitted that the court had also passed an order dated 30.04.2022 restraining the respondent No.3 from alienating the schedule property and the same has been extended from time to time. It is submitted that later they came to know that respondent No.3 has mortgaged the schedule property in favour of the respondent No.1-Canara Bank and has obtained loan from the said bank. As the petitioners has right and interest over the property and as the principal borrower has kept quite and the bank has issued the Sale Notification, if the property is sold it would cause lot of prejudice and hardship to the petitioner, which compelled him to come before this court.
-5-
NC: 2025:KHC:41195 WP No. 30557 of 2025 HC-KAR
4. It is submitted that if a reasonable time is granted they would negotiate with the principle borrower and make arrangements and make sure that the amounts are paid to bank.
5. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.1/Bank submits that the petitioners have no locus to file this writ petition as even the rights of the petitioner are not crystallized and suit is pending before the civil court. Further, the mortgage of the property in favour of the respondent No.1/Bank dated 08.10.2013, whereas according to the petitioner, the agreement of sale is dated 23.09.2019. Being a secured creditor and otherwise also his agreement is much late to the mortgage. It is submitted that the outstanding amount is Rs.4,43,38,000/- and odd and the auction is scheduled on 16.10.2025. It is submitted that there are no grounds to interfere.
6. Having heard the learned counsels on either side, perused the entire material on record. The petitioner being an agreement holder from respondent No.3 has filed a suit which is still pending. On the first ground the petitioner has no locus -6- NC: 2025:KHC:41195 WP No. 30557 of 2025 HC-KAR to maintain this petition when his rights itself are not crystallized, the same being under consideration before the competent court. Learned counsel for the petitioner has also submitted that the notice issued under Section 13(4) of the SARFAESI Act, 2002 is bad and also there are several procedural lapses. When the petitioner has no locus to file the writ petition, this court need not go into the other grounds.
Accordingly, this court is passing the following.
ORDER
i. The writ petition is dismissed.
ii. All pending I.As., in the petition shall stand closed.
SD/-
(LALITHA KANNEGANTI) JUDGE TS List No.: 2 Sl No.: 10