IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 14TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE WRIT PETITION NO.40099 OF 2017 (GM-DRT) BETWEEN:
1. NAVAGIRI FINANCE & INVESTMENTS PVT LTD REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR H. GOVINDARAJA RAO H.NO.62, AMARJYOTHI LAYOUT, SANJAY NAGAR, BANGALORE 1.
2. SHRI H GOVINDARAJ RAO S/O H RAMACHANDRA RAO AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS R/O NO.4203, ANRIYA DWELLINGTON FLATS, LG HALLI, 1ST CROSS, DOLLARS COLONY RMV 2ND STAGE, BENGALURU 560 094.
3. PROF. A.PRABHU S/O SHRI P. SHASTRY, MAJOR DEPARTMENT OF AEROSPACE ENGINEERING INDIAN INSTITUTE OF SCIENCE MALLESWARAM, BENGALURU-560 012.
(By Mr. K. SREEDHAR, ADV., (ABSENT)) AND:
KARNATAKA BANK LIMITED IDDYA BRANCH, SURATHKAL, MANGALURU TALUK AND DAKSHINA KANNDA DISTRICT REPRESENTED BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER.
(By Mr. K.V. SHYAM PRASAD, ADV.,) - - -
… PETITIONERS … RESPONDENT THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DTD.15.11.2007 IN O.A.NO.209/2003 ANNEX-A IN SO FAR AS IT RELATES TO DEFENDANTS 1 TO 3 AS THE SAME IS ILLEGAL, ARBITARY AND UNSUSTAINABLE. QUASH THE IMPUGNED PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE DEBT RECOVERY TRIBUNAL, BENGALURU VIDE ANNEX-B & ETC.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-
ORDER None for the petitioner.
Mr.K.V.Shyam Prasad, learned counsel for the respondent.
2. The writ petition is admitted for hearing.
With consent of the parties, the same is heard finally.
3. In this petition, the petitioner has assailed the validity of the order dated 15.11.2017 passed by the Debt Recovery Tribunal.
4. When the matter was taken up today, learned counsel for the respondent submitted that the respondent has an efficacious remedy of filing an appeal under Section 20 of the Recovery of Debts Due to Bank and Financial Institutions Act, 1993 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’ for short) and the petitioner be directed to avail off the aforesaid remedy.
5. In view of the submissions made and in view of the law laid down in the case of ‘UNITED BANK OF INDIA VS. SATYAWATI TONDON AND ORS.’, (2010) 8 SCC 110 the writ petition is disposed of with a liberty that in case the petitioner files an appeal under Section 20 of the Act within a period of three weeks from the date of receipt of the certified copy of the order passed today, the Tribunal shall accord the petitioner the benefit of the principles contained under Section 14 of the Limitation Act, 1963 and shall decide the appeal preferred by the petitioner.
Accordingly, the petition is disposed of.
Sd/- JUDGE SS