IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF JULY 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE WRIT PETITION NOS.21697-698 OF 2019 (GM-RES) BETWEEN:
1. SMT. ALAMELU, W/O LATE MANDIRI, AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS, R/A NO.39, 3RD CROSS, KADIRAPPA ROAD, NEAR GANESH TEMPLE, DODDIGUNTA, COX TOWN, BENGALURU – 560 005.
2. SMT. RAJESHWARI, W/O LATE MUNISWAMY, AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, R/A NO.39, 3RD CROSS, KADIRAPPA ROAD, NEAR GANESH TEMPLE, DODDIGUNTA, COX TOWN, BENGALURU– 560 005.
… PETITIONERS (BY SRI. V. B. RAVISHANKAR, ADVOCATE) AND:
1. THE AUTHORIZED OFFICER, CANARA BANK, ARMB BRANCH, NO.86, 2ND FLOOR, SPENCER’S TOWERS, M. G. ROAD, BENGALURU – 560 001.
2. C. KANAKMAL, S/O A. CHAMAPALAL JAIN, R/A NO.111, M.M.ROAD, FRAZER TOWN, BENGALURU – 560 005.
… RESPONDENTS THESE WRIT PETITIONS ARE FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER PASSED BY THE XI ADDL. CHIEF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE, BANGALORE IN CRL.MISC.NO.50225/2018 DATED 12.07.2018 ISSUED UNDER SECTION 14 OF THE SARFAESI ACT (ANNEXURE – D) AND ETC., THESE WRIT PETITIONS COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-
ORDER Sri. V. B. Ravishankar, learned counsel for the petitioners.
2. In these petitions, petitioners have assailed the validity of the order dated 12.07.2018 passed by XI Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru under Section 14 of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’ for short).
3. In view of the decision of this Court in the order dated 30.01.2019 passed in W.P.No.6594/2018 and for the reasons assigned therein, the remedy available for the petitioners is to file an application under Section 17 of the Act.
4. Accordingly, these petitions are disposed of with a liberty to the petitioners that in case they file an application before the Debts Recovery Tribunal within a period of three weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of the order passed today, they shall be entitled to the benefit of principles contained under Section 14 of the Limitation Act, 1963. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case.
Sd/- JUDGE Mds/-