IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 26TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE WRIT PETITION NO.10559 OF 2017 (GM-RES) BETWEEN:
1. SRI H T NAGENDRA RAO S/O LATE THAMMAIAH AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS R/AT SRI LAKSHMI NARASIMHA KRUPA 23RD CROSS V V NAGAR MANDYA – 571401.
2. SMT NANDINI W/O H T NAGENDRA RAO R/AT SRI LAKSHMI NARASIMHA KRUPA 23RD CROSS V V NAGAR MANDYA – 571401. (By Mr. ROHIT B J, ADV.) AND:
1. THE ICICI BANK LTD HAVING ITS OFFICE AT D.SHETTY MANSION DOOR NO.34/2, 1ST FLOOR RAMA VILAS ROAD MYSURU-570 024 REP. BY ITS MANAGER.
2. ASSETS RECONSTRUCTION CO. (INDIA) LTD HAVING ITS OFFICE AT UNIT NO.305, 3RD FLOOR KEDIA ARCADE NO.92, INFANTRY ROAD BENGALURE-560 001.
… PETITIONERS 3. THE TAHASILDAR MANDYA TALUK, MANDYA-571 401. … RESPONDENTS (By Mr. Y D HARSHA AGA FOR R3 Mr. RAMAKRISHNAN, ADV. FOR R1 Mr. FRANCIS XAVIER ADV. FOR R2) - - -
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE AUCTION NOTICE DTD:12.8.2016 ISSUED BY THE R-2 PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-E AND ETC.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-
ORDER Mr.Rohith B.J., learned counsel for the petitioner. Mr.Y.D.Harsha, learned Additional Government Advocate for Mr.Ramakrishnan, learned counsel for respondent No.1.
Mr.Francis Xavier, learned counsel for respondent No.2.
2. The writ petition is admitted for hearing.
With consent of the parties, the same is heard finally.
3. In this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners have assailed the validity of the impugned notice dated 12.08.2016 under Section 13(2) of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’ for short).
4. 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 petitioners have 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 petitioners avail of the remedy provided to them under Section 17 of the Act within three weeks from the date of receipt of the 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 petitioners and shall decide the application. Till then, the interim order shall continue.
With the aforesaid liberty, the petition is disposed of.
Sd/- JUDGE ss