IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 13TH DAY OF AUGUST 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE WRIT PETITION NO.22429/2019 & WRIT PETITION NOs.32956-32957/2019 (GM-RES) BETWEEN:
1. STANDARD AGENCIES REP. BY ITS PROPRIETOR NISAR AHMED QURESHI S/O WAZIR AHMED QURESHI AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS NO.186, KRISHNAPPA LAYOUT DODDAKANNALLI POST SARJAPURA MAIN ROAD BENGALURU – 560 035.
2. SHABEENA BANU S/O C. NISAR AHMED QURESHI AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS 3. MANZOOR AHMED QURESHI S/O C. NISAR AHMED QURESHI AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS P2 AND P3 ARE R/AT NO.252, 1ST FLOOR, 3RD MAIN, 8TH BLOCK CORPORATION BANK KORAMANGALA BENGALURU – 560 095.
(BY SRI RAHAMATHULLA SHARIFF, ADVOCATE) AND:
1. JANA SMALL FINANCE BANK LTD. NO.571, KATRIGUPPE LAYOUT …PETITIONERS 30TH MAIN ROAD NEAR DEVEGOWDA PETROL BUNK BENGALURU – 560 070 REP. BY ITS MANAGER 2. AUTHORIZED OFFICER JANA SMALL FINANCE BANK LTD. NO.571, KATRIGUPPE LAYOUT 30TH MAIN ROAD NEAR DEVEGOWDA PETROL BUNK BENGALURU – 560 070.
…RESPONDENTS THESE WRIT PETITIONS ARE FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED NOTICE ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT WHEREIN HE HAS MADE A FALSE DEMAND OF RS.40,66,735/- (RUPEES FORTY LAKHS SIXTY SIX THOUSAND SEVEN HUNDRED AND THIRTY FIVE ONLY) BY PUBLISHING THE NOTICE UNDER RULE 3 OF SECURITY INTEREST ENFORCEMENT ACT, 2002 IN A WEEKEND BUSINESS STANDARD BANGALORE EDITION DATED 23.3.2019 WHICH IS PRODUCED AS ANNEXURE-A AND ETC.
THESE WRIT PETITIONS COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
O R D E R Sri Rahamathulla Shariff, learned counsel for the petitioners. Perused the records.
2. In this petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners inter alia have assailed the validity of the notice dated 23.03.2019, issued under Section 13(2) of SARFAESI Act read with Rule 3 of the Security Interest (Enforcement) Rule, 2002.
3. When the matter was taken up today, learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the aforesaid demand notice has been issued by the petitioners by way of publication. Therefore, the petitioners were unable to file objections within the time limit prescribed in the statute. It is further submitted that in case the petitioners are granted two weeks’ time, they shall file the objections to the same.
4. In view of the aforesaid submission and in the facts of the case, the petitions are disposed of with a direction that in case the petitioners file objections to the aforesaid demand notice within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of the order passed today, the respondent - Bank shall decide the objections preferred by the petitioners before proceeding further with the matter.
With the aforesaid directions, the petitions are disposed of.
Sd/- JUDGE ca