IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 8TH DAY OF JULY, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE WRIT PETITION NOs. 21048- 21049 OF 2019 (GM-RES) BETWEEN:
1. PRAKASHCHAND CHOPRA AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS S/O LATE TEK CHAND.
2. JAYA CHOPRA AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS W/O PRAKASHCHAND CHOPRA.
BOTH ARE RESIDING AT # 20 8TH CROSS, H SIDDAIAH ROAD BENGALURU – 560 027.
... PETITIONERS (BY SRI. G. S. PRASANNA KUMAR, ADVOCATE) AND :
BHARAT COOP. BANK (MUMBAI) LTD MULTI STATE SCHEDULED BANK MONEY TERRACE, KH ROAD (DOUBEL ROAD ) BANGALURU – 560 027 REPRESENTED BY ITS DY GENL MANAGER.
... RESPONDENT (BY SRI.RAMESH P.L, ADVOCATE SRI.PUNDIKAI ISHWARA BHAT, ADVOCATE FOR C/R) THESE WRIT PETITIONS ARE FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED AUCTION NOTICE DATED 23.04.2019 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT AND PUBLISHED IN THE NEW INDIAN EXPRESS DATED 24.04.2019 FIXING THE AUCTION OF THE PETITIOENRS' PROPERTIES SITUATED AT NO.55, PID NO.70-49-55, SWASTI ROAD, SHANTHINAGAR, BENGALURU -
560 027 MEASURING 2420 SFT. ALONG WITH BUILDING THEREON AND ANOTHER PROPERTY BEARING NO.69 PARSVLABDHI NAGAR, DEVANAHALLI-SULIBELE ROAD, WARD-22, DIVISION-4, DEVANAHALLI, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT, TOTALLY MEASURING 3960 SFT, ON 10.05.2019 DIRECTING THE BIDDERS TO SUBMIT THE BIDS ON OR BEFORE 5.00 PM ON 09.05.2019 (ANNEXURE-A).
THESE PETITIONS COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-
ORDER Sri G. S. Prasanna Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioners.
Sri Ramesh P. L., learned counsel for Sri Pundikai Ishwara Bhat, learned counsel for the caveator/respondent.
2. The petitions are admitted for hearing. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the same are heard finally.
3. In these petitions, the petitioners inter alia has assailed the validity of the auction notice dated 23.04.2019 issued under Section 13(4) of the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002.
4. When the matters were taken up today, learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that in pursuance of the aforesaid auction notice, the property in question has already been auctioned. Therefore, nothing survives for adjudication in these writ petitions and the same are rendered infructuous.
5. The aforesaid submission is taken on record.
Accordingly, the writ petitions are dismissed as having become infructuous. It is needless to state that it is open for the petitioners to approach the respondent, if they so desire.
Sd/- JUDGE SA Ct:sr