IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF FEBRUARY 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE WRIT PETITION NO.7735 OF 2018 (GM-RES) BETWEEN:
M/s. Jai Bharathi Rice Mills Pvt. Ltd., Company incorporated in India And having its registered office At No.745/7, 746/F8/F, Ward No.7, B H Road, Opposite Maruthi Talkies, Tumkur – 572 103.
Represented by its Managing Director, Sri. T.C. Prabhu Prasad, S/o Late Channabasanna, Aged about 66 years, R/a Shilpa Shree, 15th Cross, Nandish Layout, SIT Extension, Tumkur – 572 103.
… Petitioner (By Sri.Amruth Chowdhary S., Advocate) AND:
1. Reserve Bank of India, Represented by its Regional Director, 10/03, Nrupathunga Road, Bengaluru – 560 001.
2. Deputy Commissioner, Tumkur District, Tumkur – 572 103.
3. Authorised Officer, DCB Bank Ltd., No.128, Prestige Meridian Annex, M.G. Road, Bengaluru – 560 001.
4. Authorised Officer, Asset Reconstruction Company Ltd., Arcil Arms Unit No.305, 3rd Floor, No.92, Infantry Road, (Opp to ICICI Bank), Bengaluru – 560 001.
… Respondents (By Sri. Vijay Kumar A. Patil, AGA for R2;
Sri. Fancis Xavier, Advocate for C/R4) This Writ Petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, praying to quash the impugned possession order passed by the respondent No.2, Deputy Commissioner dated 15.09.2014 at Annexure-E, and etc.
This petition coming on for Orders, this day, the Court made the following:-
ORDER Sri. Amruth Chowdhary S., learned counsel for the petitioner.
Sri. Vijay Kumar A. Patil, learned Additional Government Advocate for respondent No.2.
Sri. Francis Xavier, learned counsel for respondent No.4.
Petition is admitted for hearing. With consent of learned counsel for the parties, the same is heard finally.
2. In this petition, the petitioner inter alia seeks quashment of the order dated 16.03.2015 passed by the Debts Recovery Tribunal in IR No.3726/2013 at Annexure-F1.
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 petitioner is to file an appeal under Section 18 of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’ for short) before the Appellate Tribunal.
4. Accordingly, petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner that in case he files an appeal under Section 18 of the Act before the Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal within a period of three weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of the order passed today, he shall be entitled to the benefit of principles contained under Section 14 of the Limitation Act, 1963.
Sd/- JUDGE Mds/-