As per case facts, defendant No. 2 mortgaged a property to AU Small Finance Bank and later sold it to the plaintiff. The plaintiff, a subsequent purchaser, filed a civil ... suit for title declaration and an injunction against the bank, which was taking measures under the SARFAESI Act and attempting to take possession. The bank filed an application under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC to reject the plaint, arguing the civil court lacked jurisdiction as per the SARFAESI Act, but the trial court dismissed it. The bank then filed a revision petition. The question arose whether a civil court has jurisdiction to entertain a suit by a subsequent purchaser challenging bank actions under the SARFAESI Act, or if the Debts Recovery Tribunal (DRT) is the sole competent authority. Finally, the High Court, citing Apex Court judgments, ruled that the civil suit was barred by Section 34 of the SARFAESI Act. It held that the plaintiff, as an aggrieved "any person," must approach the DRT under Section 17. The court also clarified that "security agreement" and "security interest" definitions under SARFAESI are broad, covering various forms of security, validating the bank's claim. Therefore, the High Court allowed the revision, setting aside the trial court's order, rejecting the plaint, and directing the plaintiff to the DRT.