IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 26TH DAY OF JULY 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE WRIT PETITION NO.24399/2018 (GM - DRT) BETWEEN:
1. SMT. GIRIJAMMA, W/O T.V.SIDDAPPA, AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS, 2. T.V.SIDDAPPA, S/O LATE VEERANNA, AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, BOTH ARE R/O SHIVA NILAYA, NEAR NANJUNDESHWARA BEKARY, CHIKKAPET, TUMKUR, DISTRICT: TUMKUR – 572 101.
...PETITIONERS (BY SRI.S.P.KULKARNI, ADVOCATE) AND:
1. VIJAYA BANK, TUMKUR BRANCH, TUMKUR – 572 101. REPRESENTED BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER.
2. M/S. TUMKUR VEERASHYVA CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD., S.S.PURAM, TUMKUR – 572 101.
REPRESENTED BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER.
… RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. PRASHANTH P.N., ADVOCATE FOR R1; NOTICE TO R2 IS HELD SUFFICIENT VIDE ORDER DATED 18.08.2018) - - -
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 12.04.2018 PASSED BY THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL – II KARNATAKA, BENGALURU BEING ARBITRARY, ERRONEOUS AND OPPOSED TO LAW EQUITY AND JUSTICE AT ANNEXURE – D AND ETC., THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
O R D E R No.1 Sri.S.P.Kulkarni, learned counsel for petitioners. Sri.Prashanth.P.N, learned counsel for respondent 2. The petition is admitted for hearing. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the same is heard finally.
3. In this petition, the petitioners inter alia have prayed for the following reliefs:
“i. Issue a writ of certiorari or any other writ or order or direction quashing the order dated 12.4.2018 made in T.A.No.941/2017 (O.A.No.818/2016-DRT-1) passed by Debts Recovery Tribunal-II Karnataka, Bengaluru being arbitrary, erroneous and opposed to law equity and justice (Annexure-D);
ii) Dismiss T.A.No.941/2017 (O.A.No.818/2016-DRT-1) filed by first respondent herein before the Debts Recovery Tribunal-II Karnataka, Bengaluru.”
4. When the matter was taken up today, learned counsel for the petitioners fairly submits that the petitioners have an alternative efficacious remedy of filing a petition under Section 17 of The Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Securities Interest Act, 2002 (‘SARFAESI Act’ for short).
5. In view of the aforesaid submission and in the facts of the case, it is directed that in case the petitioners file a petition under Section 17 of the Act within a period of four weeks from today, the Debts Recovery Tribunal shall extend the benefit of principles contained in Section 14 of the Limitation Act, 1963 and shall decide the petition preferred by the petitioners on merits expeditiously in accordance with law.
Accordingly, the petition is disposed of.
Needless to state that the petitioners are at liberty to file an application seeking interim stay before the Debts Recovery Tribunal. The aforesaid application shall be dealt with by the Tribunal on its own merits.
Sd/- JUDGE ln.