In The High Court of Karnataka at Bangalore Dated This The 16 Day of December, 2013 Before

1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE

DATED THIS THE 16
TH
DAY OF DECEMBER, 2013

BEFORE

THE HONBLE MR. JUSTICE A.N. VENUGOPALA GOWDA

WRIT PETITION NO.15348 OF 2012 (GM-RES)
BETWEEN:

MR. C.M.THIMMAIAH
S/O C.D.MAADAPPA
AGED 55 YEARS
RESIDING AT NO.1, FLAT NO.S-002
2
ND
FLOOR, PLATINUM PARAMOUNT
8
TH
CROSS, SHARADHA NAGAR
YESHWANTHPUR, JALAHALLI P.O.,
BANGALORE-560 013
... PETITIONER
(BY SRI T.A.CHANNAKESHAVA REDDY, ADV.,)

AND:

1. STATE BANK OF INDIA
REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORIZED OFFICER
STRESSED ASSETS RECOVERY BRANCH
1
ST
FLOOR, BANGALORE CITY BRANCH
J.C.ROAD
BANGALORE-560 002

2. M.D.SESHADRI
NO.6, GURUKRUPA
3
RD
CROSS, DEVAPPA GARDEN
R.M.V II STAGE
BANGALORE-560094
... RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI K. PRAKASH, ADV., FOR R1)
(BY SRI N. SURESH, ADV., FOR R2)

2
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226
OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH
THE NOTICE DATED 2.5.12 ISSUED BY R1 VIDE ANNX-D.

THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY
HEARING THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

O R D E R

The petitioner by contending that he is a tenant in
possession of the premises shown in the schedule of the
writ petition, on the basis of a document dated
16.01.2012 executed by respondent No.2, has filed this
writ petition to quash the notice dated 02.05.2012 as at
Annexure-D, issued by respondent No.1.

2. By the said communication, respondent No.1
notified the petitioner, of the credit facilities sanctioned
to respondent No.2, by securing equitable mortgage of
the immovable property / petition schedule property
and the recovery proceedings initiated under the
Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets
and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 and the
notice issued demanding payment of the banks due
under Section 13(2) of the Act on 07.03.2009 and the

3
symbolic possession having been taken on 17.09.2009
and its publication in newspapers on 23.09.2009.
Petitioner was notified that the property would be
brought to sale as per the provisions of the said Act for
realization of the dues and he was requested to vacate
and hand over the vacant possession of the property to
enable the bank to hand over the same to the successful
tenderer / bidder, in the auction proposed to be
conducted. Petitioner was notified that incase the
possession of the property is not handed over
peacefully, it would be taking possession of the property
with the assistance of law enforcement officials and as
per the order passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate,
Bangalore in case No.5245/2011.

3. In WP No.12985/2013 decided on
11.07.2013, involving similar issue, finding that the
petitioner can avail remedy under Section 17 of
SARFAESI Act before the Debts Recovery Tribunal and
that in the first instance, an interim order having been

4
granted, by making it clear that benefit of the said order
shall enure to the petitioner till the DRT is approached
for relief, the writ petition was disposed of permitting
the petitioner to file an appeal within four weeks from
the date of receipt of a copy of the order. Until then, the
Authorized Officer of the bank was restrained from
interfering with the physical possession of the property
of the writ petitioner.

4. The petitioner herein has the benefit of the
interim order dated 10.05.2012. By the said order, the
first respondent was restrained from dispossessing the
petitioner from the premises for a period of two months.
The said interim order was extended on 17.08.2012.

5. The facts in this case being identical, this
writ petition is disposed of in terms of the order dated
11.07.2013 passed in WP No.12985/2013, granting four
weeks time to the petitioner to approach the Debts
Recovery Tribunal for relief, as against the impugned
auction. Till the DRT is approached for relief ie., within

5
the said period, it is made clear that the respondent
shall not interfere with the physical possession and
enjoyment of the subject premises by the petitioner.

Contentions of both the parties are kept open for
consideration and decision by DRT. Petition is disposed
of accordingly, with no order as to costs.

Sd/-
JUDGE

GH

In The High Court of Karnataka at Bangalore Dated This The 16 Day of December, 2013 Before

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

In The High Court of Karnataka at Bangalore Dated This The 16 Day of December, 2013 Before

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

In The High Court of Karnataka at Bangalore Dated This The 16 Day of December, 2013 Before

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE

You might also like