IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE WRIT PETITION NO.42517 OF 2016 (GM-RES) BETWEEN:
SRI. G. M. JAGDEESH S/O SRI MANJAPPA AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS SCHOOL TEACHER R/AT I FLOOR 12TH CROSS RAGHAVENDRA BADAVANE SOPPUGUDDE THIRTHALLI – 577025. … PETITIONER (By Mr. H K SRIVASTAVA, ADV. (ABSENT)) AND:
1. STATE BANK OF HYDERABAD HARNALLI MANJAPPA COMPLEX, PARK EXTENSION MAIN ROAD, DURGIGUDI SHIMOGA – 577201.
2. SMT PADMA RAO W/O MADHAVA RAO 12TH CROSS, RAGHAVENDRA EXTENSION WARD NO 1 SOPPU GUDDE, THIRTHALLI TOWN SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT – 577205.
3. SRI NANDAN RAO S/O MADHAVA RAO MARUTHI BUILDING, B H ROAD SHIVAMOGGA – 577201. … RESPONDENTS (By Mr.ABHILASH H.S., ADV. FOR SRI. C VINAY SWAMY ADV., FOR R1 R2 & R3 SERVED AND UNPRESENTED) This Writ Petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, praying to direct the R-1 not to disposed the petitioner without following the due process of law as envisaged Under Section 106 of the transfer of property act and etc.
This Petition coming on for Preliminary Hearing in ’B’ group this day, the Court made the following:-
ORDER None for the petitioner.
Sri.Abhilash H.S., learned counsel for Sri.C.Vinay Swamy, learned counsel for the respondent No.1.
2. In this petition, the petitioner inter alia has prayed for the following reliefs:
i) Issue a Writ of mandamus directing the 1st Respondent not to disposes the petitioner without following the due process of law as envisaged Under Section 106 of the Transfer of Property Act.
ii) Issue a Writ of mandamus directing the Respondents to pay a sum of Rs.50,000/- (Fifty Thousand only) at the time of vacating the schedule premises.
iii) To pass any appropriate order as this Hon‘ble Court may deem fit in the facts and circumstances of the case including the cost of the Petition in the interest of justice and equity.
4. When the matter was taken up today, learned counsel for the respondent submitted that the petitioner has an alternative and efficacious remedy under Section 17 of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002.
5. In view of the order dated 30.01.2019 passed by this Court in W.P.No.6594/2018 and for the reasons assigned therein, the petitioner has a remedy of filing an application under Section 17 of the Act. For the aforementioned reasons, the petition is disposed of with a liberty that in case the petitioner avails of the remedy provided under Section 17 of the Act within three weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of the order passed today, the Tribunal shall extend the benefit of principles contained under Section 14 of the Limitation Act, 1963, to the petitioner and shall decide the application.
With the aforesaid liberty, the petition is disposed of.
Sd/- JUDGE RV