IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE B. VEERAPPA WRIT PETITION Nos.48880-48884/2019(GM-RES) BETWEEN:
1 . MR. ANOOP BALACHANDRAN NAIR, S/O K. K. BALACHANDRAN NAIR, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, 2 . MRS. SAMEENA ABDULLA W/O ANOOP BALACHANDRAN NAIR AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS, BOTH RESIDING AT FLAT NO. 123 PURPLE WOODS APARTMENT, JINKETHIMMANAHALLI VILLAGE THAMBUCHETTI POST BIDARAHALLI BENGALURU EAST TALUK.
3 . MR. RENJIT WILSON S/O WILSON KOSHY AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS, BENGALURU EAST TALUK 4 . MR. WILSON KOSHY S/O M.S. KOSHY AGED ABOUT 69 YEARS, BOTH RESIDING AT FLAT NO. 301 PURPLE WOODS APARTMENT, JINKETHIMMANAHALLI VILLAGE, THAMBUCHETTI POST, BIDARAHALLI, BENGALURU EAST TALUK, 5 . MR. PURUSHOTHAM M S/O C. K. MEGARAJ, AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS, 6 . MRS. NISHA PURUSHOTHAM W/O PURUSHOTHAM AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS, BOTH RESIDING AT 8, 5TH CROSS, 5TH MAIN, HIGH TENSION LANE, SIR M. NAGAR, RAMAMURTHY NAGAR, BENGALURU.
7 . MR. S. SHIVAKUMAR S/O LATE A SUBBIAH, AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS, RESIDING AT FLAT NO. 116, PURPLE WOODS APARTMENT JINKETHIMMANAHALLI VILLAGE THAMBUCHETTI POST BIDARAHALLI BENGALURU EAST TALUK 8. MR. G.E. KARTHIK S/O EASWARAN G. G., AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS, RESIDING AT FLAT NO. 222, PURPLE WOODS APARTMENT JINKETHIMMANAHALLI VILLAGE THAMBUCHETTI POST BIDARAHALLI BENGALURU EAST TALUK.
...PETITIONERS (BY SRI B.L. SANJEEV, ADVOCATE) AND:
1. ANANDRATHI GLOBAL FINANCE LTD., THROUGH ITS AUTHORIZED OFFICER, MR. SHRINIVAS HULLIKATTI HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT 10TH FLOOR, EXPRESS ZONE, WESTERN EXPRESS HIGHWAY, GOREGAON (EAST) MUMBAI - 400 063.
2. PURPLE ESTATES AND HOLDINGS PVT. LTD., REGISTERED OFFICE 131, D-3, 2ND FLOOR, DEVATHA PLAZA, RESIDENCY ROAD, BENGALURU-560025.
3. Mr. THOMAS MATHEW (DIRECTOR) (GUARANTOR), (OFFICE ADDRESS AS ABOVE MENTIONED) RESIDENTIAL ADDRESS, 14, RAINBOW RESIDENCY LAYOUT, JUNASANDRA VILLAGE VARTHUR HOBLI, BENGALURU EAST TALUK, BENGALURU-560035.
4. Mrs. BETTY THOMAS (DIRECTOR) (GUARANTOR), (OFFICE ADDRESS AS ABOVE MENTIONED) RESIDENTIAL ADDRESS, 14, RAINBOW RESIDENCY LAYOUT, JUNASANDRA VILLAGE VARTHUR HOBLI, BENGALURU EAST TALUK, BENGALURU-560035.
…RESPONDENTS (BY SRI N. DINESH RAO, ADVOCATE FOR R1;
VIDE ORDER DATED 4.11.2019 NOTICE TO R2 TO R4 IS DISPENSED WITH) **** THESE WRIT PETITIONS ARE FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DECLARE THAT THE ORDER DATED 17.08.2019 PASSSED BY THE X ADDITIONAL CHIEF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE, BENGALURU CITY IN C.MISC.No. 50263/2019, VIDE ANNEXURE-K, IS NOT APPLICABLE TO THE SCHEDULE PROPERTIES BELONGING TO THE PETITIONERS.
THESE WRIT PETITIONS COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-
O R D E R The petitioners in these writ petitions have sought for the following reliefs:
“Issue a writ in the nature of declaration or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, declaring that the order dated 17.8.2019 passed by the X Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru City in C.Misc. No.50263/2019, vide Annexure-K is not applicable to the schedule properties belonging to the petitioners.”
2. Learned counsel for the petitioners contended that though the amount due to the 1st respondent – Finance Company from the 2nd respondent is Rs.12,00,00,000/- (Rupees twelve crores only), the 1st respondent – Finance Company already taken possession of 27 flats worth about Rs.19,00,00,000/- (Rupees nineteen crores only), which is more than the amount due to the 1st respondent – Finance Company.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners filed Rejoinder before this Court and the contents of the same are disputed by Sri N. Dinesh Rao, learned counsel for the Respondent No.1 – Finance Company and contended that there are disputed facts and this Court cannot interfere in these writ petitions.
4. Sri Dinesh Rao, learned counsel for the 1st respondent – Finance Company contended that against the impugned order dated 17.8.2019 passed by the 10th Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bangalore City as per Annexure-K allowing the Petition filed by the present 1st respondent – Finance Company under Section 14 of the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (‘SARFAESI Act’ for short), the petitioners have got alternative remedy of appeal under the provisions of Section 17 of the SARFAESI Act before the Debts Recovery Tribunal (‘DRT’ for short).
5. The said submission is placed on record. The same is not disputed by the learned counsel for the petitioners.
6. In view of the above, these writ petitions are disposed off with liberty to the petitioners to approach the Appropriate Authority under the provisions of Section 17 of the SARFAESI Act within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order.
7. Till then, 1st respondent – Finance Company shall not take any precipitative action in the matter.
8. It is made clear that no further extension of time will be granted to the petitioners to avail the alternative remedy of appeal under the provisions of Section – 17 of the SARFAESI Act. If such an appeal is filed, the Debts Recovery Tribunal shall decide the same in accordance with law.
With these observations, the Writ Petitions are disposed off.
Sd/-
JUDGE Gss/-