IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF JULY 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE WRIT PETITION NO.28037 OF 2019 & WRIT PETITION NO.28363 OF 2019 (GM - DRT) BETWEEN:
1. S.Mohammed Riyaz Ahmed, S/o.Mr.B.Sattar Khan, Age about 66 years.
2. Mrs. Shaheen Begum, W/o. S.Mohammed Riyaz Ahmed, Age about 54 years, Both are R/at C/o Ahmed Fazil, No.7, Rainbow Residency, 2nd Floor, 11th Cross, Lingarajpuram, Bengaluru – 560 084.
Rep. by their GPA Holder, Mrs. Shazama Taj, W/o. Mr.Wajhullah Shariff, Age about 62 years, R/at No.428, 1st Floor, 2nd Main, 3rd stage, Pillanna Garden, Bengaluru – 560 045.
… Petitioners (By Sri. Naveed Ahmed, Advocate) AND:
1. Citi Financial Consumer Finance India Ltd. No.162, Shri Centre, AECS Layout, Rajgopal road, Sanjaynagar, Bengaluru – 560 094 Rep by its Authorized Officer.
2. City Bank NA, Having its Principal Office at 3LSX, Commercial Complex, Puspvihar, New Delhi – 110 062, Rep by its Authorized Officer.
3. Phoenix ARC Pvt. Ltd.
7th Floor, Dani Corporate Park, 158, CST Road, Kalina Santacruz, Mumbai – 400 098.
Rep. by its Authorized Officer.
…Respondents (By Sri. Francis Xavier, Advocate for R2) These Writ Petitions are filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India praying to set aside the impugned order dated 5th April, 2019 passed by the Learned Debt Recovery Tribunal, Bangalore in I.R.No.3004/2018 vacating interim order of stay vide as Annexure-A.
These Writ Petitions coming on for Orders, this day, the Court made the following:-
ORDER Sri. Naveed Ahmed, learned counsel for the petitioners.
Sri. Francis Xavier, learned counsel for respondent No.2.
These petitions are admitted for hearing. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the same are heard finally.
2. In these writ petitions, the petitioners inter alia have assailed the validity of the order dated 05.04.2019 passed by the Debts Recovery Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Tribunal’ for short) by which the Tribunal has directed the petitioners to pay a further sum of `2,00,000/- as a condition precedent for continuation of the interim order granted by it.
3. When these maters were taken up today, learned counsel for the parties jointly submitted that the matter is pending before the Tribunal and the proceedings are fixed for final hearing on 18.09.2019.
4. It is further submitted by learned counsel for the respondent-Bank that the Bank shall not take possession of the property in question in case the petitioner undertakes to argue the matter before the Tribunal on 18.09.2019 and does not seek any further adjournment. In response, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners shall not seek any adjournment and shall positively argue the matter on 18.09.2019.
5. In view of the aforesaid submission and in the facts of the case, these petitions are disposed of with a direction to the petitioners to argue the matter positively before the Tribunal on 18.09.2019. It is made clear that in case the petitioners do not argue the case on 18.09.2019 before the Tribunal, respondent-Bank shall be at liberty to take action in accordance with law.
With the aforesaid direction, these petitions are disposed of.
Mds/-
Sd/- JUDGE