HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA AND HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE M. SATYANARAYANA MURTHY WRIT PETITION No. 13906 of 2014 Dated: 29.04.2014 Between:
M/s.Jasleen Enterprises, Rep. by its Managing Partner, Mr.Ranbeer Singh Gandhi …..Petitioner And Union Bank of India Limited, Rep. by Authorized Officer and four others.
....Respondents The Court made the following :
HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA AND HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE M. SATYANARAYANA MURTHY WRIT PETITION No. 13906 of 2014 ORDER : (per Hon'ble Sri Justice Ashutosh Mohunta) This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of the India seeking to declare the notice issued by the 1st respondent dated 07.12.2013 and consequential appointment of the 5th respondent as an Advocate Commissioner by the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate-cum-Additional Senior Civil Judge, Ranga Reddy in Case No.456 of 2014 to take the physical possession of the petitioner’s premises mentioned in Item No.1 to 4 of the schedule situated in Sy.No.615 and 617, Industrial Estate, Mouli, Malkajgiri Municipality, Ranga Reddy District, as illegal.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the respondent-Bank has straight away initiated proceedings under Section 14 of the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interests Act, 2002 (for short, ‘SARFAESI Act’) and that the 5th respondent has been appointed as Advocate Commissioner to take over the physical possession of the property in question. He further submits that in case the possession is taken, the petitioner will be left with no legal remedy to challenge the action of the respondent-bank.
3. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents placed reliance on the decision of the Apex Court reported i n Kanaiyalal Lalchand Sachdev v. State of
[1]
Maharastra , wherein it was held that the petitioner has the statutory remedy of filing an appeal against the proceedings initiated under Section 17(1) of the SARFAESI Act.
4. In view of the above, it is clear that the petitioner does have a legal remedy of filing an appeal, and therefore, the present writ petition is not maintainable.
5. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of, giving liberty to the petitioner to avail the legal remedy of filing an appeal provided under the SARFAESI Act. However, the respondent-bank is restrained from taking possession of the subject property, for a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No order as to costs.
6. Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending in this Writ Petition shall stand closed.
ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA, J M. SATYANARAYANA MURTHY, J 29th April 2014.
Note:
Issue C.C. in three days.
(B/o.) mar
[1] 2011(2) SCC 782