Case :- WRIT - C No. - 16377 of 2016 Petitioner :- Smt. Kanti Singh Respondent :- Authorized Officer, P.N.B., Recovery Dept. And Another Counsel for Petitioner :- Virendra Kumar Srivastava,Sudarshan Singh Counsel for Respondent :- Sudha Pandey,Dharmendra Vaish,S.C.,Sujeet Kumar Hon'ble Amreshwar Pratap Sahi,J. Hon'ble Shashi Kant,J.
In re: Civil Misc. Impleadment Application dated 16.04.2016 It is not necessary to implead the party for which the prayer has been made keeping in view the directions issued by us today in the main writ petition.
The application is accordingly rejected.
Order Date :- 25.4.2018 KA
Court No. - 40
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 16377 of 2016 Petitioner :- Smt. Kanti Singh Respondent :- Authorized Officer, P.N.B., Recovery Dept. And Another Counsel for Petitioner :- Virendra Kumar Srivastava,Sudarshan Singh Counsel for Respondent :- Sudha Pandey,Dharmendra Vaish,S.C.,Sujeet Kumar Hon'ble Amreshwar Pratap Sahi,J. Hon'ble Shashi Kant,J.
In re: Civil Misc. Impleadment Application dated 25.05.2016 No one has appeared to press this impleadment application. It is accordingly consigned to records.
Order Date :- 25.4.2018 KA
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 16377 of 2016
Petitioner :- Smt. Kanti Singh
Respondent :- Authorized Officer, P.N.B., Recovery Dept. And Another
Counsel for Petitioner :- Virendra Kumar Srivastava,Sudarshan Singh
Counsel for Respondent :- Sudha Pandey,Dharmendra Vaish,S.C.,Sujeet Kumar
Hon'ble Amreshwar Pratap Sahi,J. Hon'ble Shashi Kant,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Shesh Nath Bhatt, Advocate, holding brief of Sri Dharmendra Vaish, learned counsel for the Bank.
The petitioner is an auction purchaser. She has filed this writ petition seeking possession of the property which has been auctioned in her favour under the proceedings of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (hereinafter referred to as "2002 Act").
The bank has come up with a plea that it has already made the requisite deposit with the police authorities for providing adequate force. The taking over of possession by the Bank under Section 14 is a separate issue altogether. So far as an auction purchaser is concerned, the he/she can also take possession but the same has to be in accordance with the provisions of the Security Interest (Enforcement) Rules, 2002 read with the Income-Tax (Certificate Proceedings) Rules, 1962.
The petitioner will, therefore, now move an appropriate application before the competent authority seeking such relief for enforcing the delivery of possession to the petitioner in terms of Rule 9(9) of the Security Interest (Enforcement) Rules, 2002 read with procedure prescribed under the Income-Tax (Certificate Proceedings) Rules, 1962. If such an application is filed the competent authority shall proceed in terms of the said rules after putting the occupier/the person in possession and then take an action in accordance with the said rules provided there is no other legal impediment.
We may also put on record that the borrower had filed Writ Petition No.33143 of 2015 which was dismissed on the ground of alternative remedy to the borrower to file an appeal in terms of Section 18 of the 2002 Act. There is nothing on record to indicate as to whether any appeal has been filed or not. The authority before proceeding to take any action shall verify the status of any such proceedings pending before the Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal or any other authority and then take action accordingly.
The writ petition is disposed of with the said directions.
Order Date :- 25.4.2018 KA