IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 15th DAY OF JULY 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE WRIT PETITION NOs.27855-27856 OF 2019 (GM-RES) BETWEEN MOHAMMED JANI SAIT, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, SON OF MOHAMMED GHOUSE 68, JANAVI NILAYA, GROUND FLOOR, 5TH MAIN, BHUVANESWARINAGAR, RT NAGAR, BENGALURU 560032. ... PETITIONER (BY SRI.S.R.SREEPRASAD, ADV.,) AND 1. THE AUTHORISED OFFICER, SYNDICATE BANK, NELAMANGALA BRANCH, 3385/3388, PARAMPARA LAYOUT, B H ROAD, NELAMANGALA-562123.
2. MR NATARAJU, AGED 51 YEARS, SON OF SRI M P SWAMY, NO.3, 1ST FLOOR, 4TH B CROSS, MKC GARDEN, ANANDANAGAR, I BLOCK, RT NAGAR, BENGALURU 560032. ... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI./SMT : NULL) THESE WRIT PETITIONS ARE FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DTD:23.4.2019 PASSED IN C.MISC.726/2019 PRODUCED VIDE ANNEXURE-A AND THE NOTICE OF POSSESSION ISSUED BY THE R-1 DTD:4.6.2019 PRODUCED AS ANNEXURE-B.
THESE PETITIONS COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-
ORDER Sri.S.R.Sreeprasad, learned counsel for the petitioner.
2. The petition is admitted for hearing. With consent of the learned counsel for the parties, the same is heard finally.
3. In this petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner who claims to be a tenant inter alia assailed the validity of the order dated 23.04.2019 passed by the Debt Recovery Tribunal under Section 14 of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’ for short).
4. When the matter was taken up today, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has already filed a petition under Section 17 of the Act along with an application for stay. However, till today, the application for stay filed by the petitioner has not been decided.
5. In view of aforesaid submission, the Petition is disposed of with a direction that in case the application for stay filed by the petitioner is still pending, the Debt Recovery Tribunal shall positively decide the same after hearing the necessary parties. Till then, status-quo as it exists today with regard to possession shall be maintained.
It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case.
Accordingly, the petition is disposed of.
Sd/- JUDGE BNV Ct-rg