IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF MARCH 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE WRIT PETITION NOs.10675-10676 OF 2019 (GM-DRT) BETWEEN:
1. SMT P. PADMA AGED ABOUT 75 YEAS W/O PADMANABHAN NO.77/15-1, 7TH MAIN NANDA KUMAR LAYOUT RAMANJANEYA NAGAR BENGALURU-560 011.
2. SRI PANNER SELVAM AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS S/O K PADMANABHAN NO.10, RBI COLONY JAYANAGAR, BENGALURU-560 011.
(BY MR.VASANTH ADITHYA J, ADV.) AND:
1. THE AUTHORIZED OFFICER AXIS BANK, 55/5, 30TH CROSS 13TH MAIN, 4TH BLOCK JAYANAGAR, BENGALURU-560 011.
… PETITIONERS 2. THE AUTHORIZED OFFICER INTERNATIONAL ASSET RECONSTRUCTION COMPANY PVT.LTD.
2 BKG RETREAT, OLD NO.119 NEW NO.26, GN CHETTY ROAD T NAGAR, CHENNAI-600 01.
3. NEELIMA C/O IARC, A/508 5TH FLOOR, 215 ATRIUM KANAKIA SPACES ANDHERI KURLA ROAD ANDHERI EAST MUMBAI-400069.
4. THE RECOVERY OFFICER-1 DRT I, BENGALURU LIC JEEVAN MANGAL BUILDING 2ND FLOOR, NO.4 RESIDENCY ROAD BENGALURU-560 025.
… RESPONDENTS THESE WRIT PETITIONS ARE FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO STAY AND SET ASIDE THE EXECUTION OF SALE PROCLAMATION (WARRANT) DCP NO.8847 IN OA NO.229/2008 [ANNEXURE-K] DATED 20.2.2019 ISSUED BY THE RECOVERY OFFICER DRT INCLUDING THE ORDER DATED 8.12.2014 ANNEXURE-A IN THE OA SUIT NO.229/2008 AND THE FIRST RECOVERY AS NULL AND VOID TO SET ASIDE ALL THOSE RECOVERY STEPS INCLUDING THE OA SUIT ORDER AND FOLLOW-UP NOTICES ISSUED THEREON, INITIATED ILLEGALLY BOTH BY THE RESPONDENT BANK AND THE IARC AS ILLEGAL AND VOID AS THE FOREGOING DEMAND NOTICES BY THE RECOVERY OFFICER WERE ISSUED WITHOUT SERVING ORDER PASSED IN THE ABOVE OA SUIT NO.229/2008 TO THE PETITIONER BORROWER COMPANY AND OTHER DIRECTORS WHICH IS MANDATORY AND ETC.
THESE WRIT PETITIONS COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-
ORDER Sri.Vasanth Adithya.J, 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 respondents.
In these petitions, the petitioners have assailed the validity of Proclamation of Sale dated 20.02.2019.
2. When the matter was taken up today, learned counsel for the petitioners fairly submitted that being aggrieved by the aforesaid Proclamation of Sale, the petitioners have approached the Debts Recovery Tribunal, Bengaluru by filing an application under Section 17 of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002. However, the Debts Recovery Tribunal is not adjudicating the objection preferred by the petitioners on merits.
3. In view of the aforesaid submission and in the facts of the case, the petitions are disposed of with a direction to the Debts Recovery Tribunal to consider and decide the application for stay preferred by the petitioners, if any, within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of the certified copy of the order passed today by a speaking order.
4. Till the application for stay is decided, no coercive action against the petitioners shall be taken.
5. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case.
Accordingly, the writ petitions are disposed of.
Sd/- JUDGE dn/-