IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF APRIL, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE WRIT PETITION NO. 52941 OF 2016 (GM-RES) BETWEEN:
K .S .PUTTAPPA S/O LATE SIDDAPPA AGED 60 YEARS R/A KAMBADALU, HOSUR POST BHADRAVATHI TALUK SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT-577301 (BY SRI B.S. PRASAD, ADVOCATE) AND :
1. VIJAYA BANK A GOVT. OF INDIA UNDERTAKING SHIVAMOGGA BRANCH BH ROAD, SHIVAMOGGA-577 201 ... PETITIONER REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORISED OFFICER 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER AND DISTRICT MAGISTRATE SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT SHIVAMOGGA - 577 201 (BY SRI Y.D. HARSHA, AGA FOR R.2, ... RESPONDENTS SRI NAGARAJ DAMODAR, ADV., FOR R.1) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DTD:27.5.2016 PASSED BY THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER AND DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, SHIVAMOGGA (ANNEXURE-A) AND ETC.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-
ORDER Sri B. S. Prasad, learned counsel for the petitioner. Sri. Y.D. Harsha, learned Additional Government Advocate for respondent No.2 and Sri Nagaraj Damodar, learned counsel for respondent No.1.
2. In these petitions, the petitioner inter alia has prayed the following reliefs:
“a) issue a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, setting aside the order dated 27.5.2016 in No.SMGDC.MAG(3).Sarfaesi.Cr.006/16-17 (57096) dated 27.5.2016 passed by the Deputy Commissioner and District Magistrate, Shivamogga (Annexure-A) b) Grant such other relief in the interest of justice.”
3. When the matter was taken up today, learned counsel for the petitioner fairly submitted that the petitioner has an alternative and efficacious remedy under Section 17 of the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’ for short).
4. In view of the order dated 30.01.2019 passed by this Court in W.P.No.6594/2018 and for the reasons assigned therein, the petitioner has a remedy of filing an application under Section 17 of the Act. For the aforementioned reasons, the petition is disposed of with a liberty that in case the petitioner avails of the remedy provided under Section 17 of the Act within three weeks from the date of receipt of 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. Till then, the interim order, if any, shall continue.
Sd/- JUDGE SA