IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF AUGUST 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE WRIT PETITION NO.3212 OF 2018 (GM-DRT) BETWEEN:
SMT H N HEMAVATHI W/O LATE P NAGENDRA KUMAR AGED 49 YEARS, R/A DOOR NO.40 15TH CROSS, 11TH MAIN, WILSON GARDEN LAKASANDRA EXTENSION, BENGALURU-560 027 (By MR.RANGANATHA S JOIS, ADV.(ABSENT)) AND:
1. THE MANAGER BANK OF BARODA NO.48, HAINES ROAD FRAZER TOWN BRANCH FRAZER TOWN BENGALURU-560 005 2. SRI SIVAPRASAD M V AUTHORISED OFFICER BANK OF BARODA NO.48, HAINES ROAD FRAZER TOWN BRANCH FRAZER TOWN BENGALURU-560 005 3. SRI SUBRAMANI A S/O ANJINAPPA N H AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS R/AT NO.114 NAGENAHALLI BENGALURU-560064 … PETITIONER … RESPONDENTS (By MR.GOPALAKRISHNA R HEGDE, ADV. FOR R1 & R2, MR. THYAGARAJA B , ADV. FOR R3) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO CALL FOR RECORDS RELATING TO THE IMPUGNED ORDER PASSED BY THE DEBT RECOVERY TRIBUNAL DTD:13.10.2017 MADE IN IA NO.175/2017 IN SR NO.1804/2017 VIDE ANNEXURE-A PERUSE THE SAME AND QUASH THE SAID ORDER AND THE SALE CERTIFICATE DTD:5.8.2016 AS PER THE PRAYER IN S.R.NO.1804/2017 VIDE ANNEXURE-D PASSED BY THE R-1 AND ALLOW THE PETITIONER TO REPAY THE LOAN WITHIN THE REASONABLE TIME AND DECLARE ALL THE CONSEQUENTIAL CHANGE OF TITLE, IN RESPECT OF THE SCHEDULE PROPERTY IN THE SALE CERTIFICATE AS ILLEGAL AND VOID; AND ETC.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-
ORDER None for the petitioner.
Mr.Gopala Krishna R. Hegde, learned counsel for the respondent Nos.1 and 2.
Mr.Thyagaraja B., learned counsel for the respondent No.3.
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 sale certificate dated 05.08.2016.
4. After hearing the learned counsel for the respondents, I deem it appropriate to dispose of the petition with liberty to the petitioner to take recourse to such remedy as may be available to her under Section 17 of the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002.
5. Accordingly, the petition is disposed of with a liberty that in case the petitioner avails of the remedy provided to her under Section 17 of the Act within three 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. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on merits.
Sd/- JUDGE RV