IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 11th DAY OF JULY 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE WRIT PETITION NO.3075 OF 2018 (GM-RES) BETWEEN:
SMT ASHRAF JAHAN W/O BEGLI SIRAJ AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS SA VEGETABLE FRUIT PRODUCT SHOP FLAT NO.398, MAHALAKSHMI LAYOUT GREEN BUILDING BEHIND ST.ANNS COLLEGE KOLAR – 563 101.
(BY SMT. KAVITHA D, ADV.) AND:
1. ICICI BANK LTD RACE COURSE CIRCLE VADODARA GUJARAT – 390007 BRANCH OFFICE AT MYTHRI TOWERS 3RD FLOOR EAST WING NO.4/10 BOMMANAHALLI HOSUR, BENGALURU – 560 065 REPTD BY AUTHORIZED OFFICER.
2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER & DISTRICT MAGISTRATE KOLAR DISTRICT KOLAR – 563101 (B SMT. PRATHIMA HONNAPURA, AGA FOR R2 SRI. FRANCIS XAVIER, ADV. FOR R1) - - -
… PETITIONER … RESPONDENTS THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED PHYSICAL POSSESSION ORDER DATED 05-05-2017 ISSUED BY THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER & DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, KOLAR DISTRICT, KOLAR THE SAME IS MARKED AS ANNEXURE-G; AND ETC.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-
ORDER Smt.Kavitha D., learned counsel for the petitioner.
Mr.Francis Xavier, learned counsel for the respondent No.1.
Smt.Prathima Honnapura, learned Additional Government Advocate for the respondent No.2.
2. The petition is admitted for hearing. With consent of the learned counsel for the parties, the same is heard finally.
3. In this petition, the petitioner has assailed the validity of the order dated 05.05.2017 issued by the respondent No.2.
4. When the matter was taken up today, learned counsel for the petitioner fairly submitted that the petitioner has a remedy of filing an application under Section 17 of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’ for short). She further submitted that she be granted liberty to file an application under Section 17 of the Act along with the application for stay within four weeks and till then, the interim order granted on 22.01.2018 may be continued.
5. The aforesaid submission has not been fairly opposed by the learned counsel for the respondent.
6. In view of the aforesaid submissions, the petition is disposed of with liberty that in case the petitioner files an application under Section 17 of the Act along with an application for stay within four weeks from the date of receipt of the certified copy of the order passed today, the Tribunal shall extend the benefit of principles contained under Section 14 of the Limitation Act, 1963, to the petitioner and shall decide the application. Till then, the interim order granted on 22.01.2018 shall continue. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits.
Sd/- JUDGE RV