IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF MARCH 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE WRIT PETITION Nos.9981-9983/2019 (GM-RES) BETWEEN:
1. M/S. MANMANDIR JEWELLERS, NO.27/1-B, HEBBAL MAIN ROAD, LOKANAYAKANAGARA, MYSORE – 20. REP. BY ITS PROP: MANOHAR SINGH.
2. MANOHAR SINGH SIRVI, AGED 40 YEARS, S/O PONNARAMMA.
3. PRAKASH SIRVI, AGED 37 YEARS, S/O PONNARAMMA.
PETITIONERS 2 AND 3 ARE R/AT NO 4, 3RD CROSS, MAHIYANA LAYOUT, 2ND STAGE, VIJAYANAGARA, NEAR KEERTHI SUPER MARKET, MYSURU.
AND:
... PETITIONERS (BY SMT. VINITHA P.C., ADVOCATE FOR SRI T. A. KARUMBAIAH, ADVOCATE) HDB FINANCIAL SERVICE LIMITED, CENTRAL OFFICE RADHIKA, 2ND FLOOR, LAW GARDEN ROAD, NAVARANGAPURA, AHEMEDABAD, BRANCH OFFICE AT NAKSHATRA COMPLEX, NO. 858/859 CH 20, 1ST FLOOR, NARAYANASHASTHRI ROAD, CHAMRAJ MOHALLA, MYSURU 570 064. REP BY AUTHORIZED OFFICER.
... RESPONDENT THESE WRIT PETITIONS ARE FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH ANNEXURE-B ORDER DT.7.2.2019 PASSED BY DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, MYSORE IN PROCEEDINGS NO.MAG (3) MIS 43/19; DIRECT THE RESPONDENT TO ACCEPT THE ARREARS OF EMI AMOUNTING TO RS.17.5 LAKHS AND PERMIT THE PETITIONERS TO MAKE THE FUTURE PAYMENTS IN TERMS OF THE AGREEMENT OF RS.1,46,000/- PER MONTH AND ETC.
THESE WRIT PETITIONS COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
O R D E R Smt. Vinitha P.C., learned counsel for Sri T.A. Karumbaiah, learned counsel for the petitioners.
Taking into account the order which this Court proposes to pass, it is not necessary to issue notice to the respondent.
2. The petitions are admitted for hearing. With the consent of the parties, same are heard finally.
3. In these petitions, the petitioners inter alia have assailed the validity of the order dated 7.2.2019 passed by the District Magistrate under Section 14 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 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 petitioners are relegated to the alternative remedy under Section 17 of the Act.
5. At this stage, the learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are ready and willing to pay the arrears of loan amount as well as the future EMI. He further submits that the petitioners be granted liberty to submit a fresh representation to the competent authority of the respondent and the respondent be directed to decide the representation submitted by the petitioners by a speaking order within a fixed time.
6. In view of the aforesaid submission and the facts of the case, the petitions are disposed of with liberty to the petitioners to submit the representation with regard to the grievance to the competent authority of the respondent within one week from the date of receipt of certified copy of the order passed today and the aforesaid authority shall consider and decide the representation submitted by the petitioners by a speaking order within a period of three weeks from the date of receipt of such representation.
7. Accordingly, the petitions are disposed of.
Sd/- JUDGE MD