IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE H. T. NARENDRA PRASAD WRIT PETITION No.18366 OF 2015 (GM-RES) BETWEEN:
Sri. Shamshuddin K.S., S/o. Sri. Siyali Byari, Aged About 38 Years, Siyali House, N.S.Road, Hejamadi, Udupi Taluk & District …Petitioner (By Sri K.Prasanna Shetty, Advocate) And:
1. The Authorised Officer, State Bank of Mysore, Regional Office, Karwar-581 301.
2. The Manager, State Bank of Mysore, Padubidri Branch, Mahalakshmi Complex, Udupi District-574 111. … Respondents (By Sri T.P.Muthanna, Advocate for R1 & R2) This Writ Petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, praying to quash the auction notice dated 25.3.2015 issued by the R-1 Bank at Annexure-A. Grant an interim order to stay all further proceedings under SARFAESI Act pursuant to the auction notice dated 25.03.2015 issued by the R-1 stating that auction scheduled to be held on 05.05.2015 at 3 p.m. at Annexure-A.
This Writ Petition coming on for Orders this day, the Court made the following:
O R D E R This writ petition is directed against the Sale Notice dated 25.03.2015. The petitioner has borrowed a sum of Rs.5,00,000/- from respondent No.1-Bank. Since he has not paid that amount, the Bank has initiated the proceedings under the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Securities Interest Act, 2002 (for short ‘SARFAESI Act’) and have issued an Auction Notice dated 25.03.2015. The petitioner has challenged the same before this Court.
2. This Court had granted an interim order on 28.04.2015 subject to the petitioner depositing a sum of Rs.5,00,000/- with respondent No.1 within two weeks from 28.04.2015. The petitioner had not deposited the said amount till 26.06.2015.
3. This Court by order dated 26.06.2015 has clarified that, since the order dated 28.04.2015 was not complied with, and the amount has not been deposited to respondent–Bank, interim order in any event shall not come into effect. Subsequently, the Bank has issued another Sale Notice to sell the schedule property on 04.08.2015. Aggrieved by the same the petitioner has approached Debts Recovery Tribunal (for short ‘DRT’) by filing an appeal. The DRT by order dated 03.08.2015 granted liberty to the bank to go ahead with the proposed sale of the scheduled property to be held on 04.08.2015.
4. Since the earlier Auction Notice dated 25.03.2015 in spite of being stayed, the petitioner has not complied with the interim order, hence the Bank has issued subsequent Sale Notice.
Hence, the writ petition does not survive for consideration.
Accordingly, writ petition is dismissed.
Sd/-
JUDGE rv