IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 27TH DAY OF MARCH 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE WRIT PETITION N0.36662 OF 2015 (GM-DRT) BETWEEN:
SMT. SHANTHAMMA W/O SRI. MUDDDAIAH AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS R/AT NO.1453, 1ST MAIN, NAGAPPA BLOCK, BENGALURU- 560 021. ... PETITIONER (By Sri.S.NAVEEN, ADV.) AND:
1. M/S. KOZY SILKS PRIVATE LIMITED 1ST FLOOR, POBBATHI MARKET, BASAVANNA LANE, AVENUE ROAD CROSS, BENGALURU- 560 002 REP. BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR JITENDRA SHAH.
2. SRI JITENDAR SHAH S/O SRI MANGILAL SHAH AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS R/AT NO.1, MALLIKARJUNA LANE, AVENUE ROAD CROSS, BENGALURU-02 3. SMT. KAMALA SHAH W/O SRI. MANGILAL SHAH AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS R/AT NO.1, MALLIKARJUNA LANE, AVENUE ROAD CROSS, BENGALURU-560 002 4. SRI. MANGILAL SHAH S/O SRI. SAREMAL SHAH AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS R/AT NO.1, MALLIKARJUNA LANE, AVENUE ROAD CROSS, BENGALURU-560 002 5. SMT. ROOPAL SHAH W/O SRI. JEETENDRA SHAH AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS R/AT NO.1, MALLIKARJUNA LANE, AVENUE ROAD CROSS, BENGALURU-560 002 6. THE CHIEF MANAGER STATE BANK OF MYSORE SPECIALIZED ASSET RECOVERY BRANCH, NO.2,1ST FLOOR, LADY CURZON ROAD, BENGALURU-560 001 7. THE RECOVERY OFFICER-II DEBT RECOVERY TRIBUNAL KRISHI BHAVAN, HUDSON CIRCLE, NRUPATHUNGA ROAD, BENGALURU-560 001. ... RESPONDENTS (By Sri.J.D.RAMAKRISHNA RAO, ADV. FOR R6) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE NOTICE FOR SETTLING THE SALE PROCLAMATION IN D.C.P.NO.7252 IN O.A.NO.331/2007 DTD:12.05.2015 UNDER SECTION 25 & 29 OF THE RECOVERY OF DEBTS DUE TO THE BANKS AND FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS AC 1993, R/W IT SCHEDULE TO THE T INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (ANNEXURE- F).
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
O R D E R Sri S.Naveen, learned counsel for the petitioner.
Sri J.D.Ramakrishna Rao, learned counsel for Respondent No.6.
2. In this petition filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner interalia seeks to set aside the Sale Notice dated 12.05.2015 issued by Respondent No.7 under Section 25 and 29 of the Recovery of Debts due to the Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993 read with IT Schedule to the Income Tax Act, 1961.
3. When the matter was taken up today, learned counsel for Respondent No.6 had submitted that the sale as scheduled has not taken place.
4. The aforesaid submission is taken on record.
Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed as having become infructuous.
Sd/- JUDGE DH