IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 30TH DAY OF MARCH, 2017 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE A S BOPANNA WRIT PETITION No.35192/2016 (GM-RES) BETWEEN:
SRI UDAY K M S/O MADAIAH AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS # No.4/204, 2ND FLOOR VISHAL PALACE, 1ST CROSS MALLESHWARAM BANGALORE-560 003 ... PETITIONER (BY SRI. UMESH B N, ADV.) AND:
THE AUTHORIZED OFFICER M/S. ASSET RECONSTRUCTION COMPANY (INDIA) LTD., THE RUBY, 10TH FLOOR 29, SENAPATI BAPAT MARG DADAR (WEST) MUMBAI-400028 ... RESPONDENT (BY SRI. DYAN CHINNAPPA, SR.COUNSEL FOR SRI. K V LOKESH, ADV.
SRI. R ASHOK KUMAR, ADV. FOR IMPLEADING APPLICANT ON IA 1/16) THIS PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, WITH A PRAYER TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENT TO CONSIDER THE REPRESENTATION OF THE PETITIONER DATED 31.05.2016 VIDE ANNEX-A FOR COMPLETION OF THE SALE PROCESS IN PURSUANCE TO THE LETTER DATED 12.01.2016 WHEREIN THE PETITIONER WAS DECLARED AS THE SUCCESSFUL BIDDER FOR THE ASSET LOCATED AT SITE NO.78/78, 79/79, 80/80, 81/81, 85/85, 93/93, 109/109, 110/110, 111/111, 112/112, 113/113 AND 114/114 FORMED IN LANDS BEARING SY.NO.1, 2, 3, 4, 5 AND 53/5 OF BHEEMANAHALLY, BEHIND IOC PETROL BUNK, SHYANAMANGALA ROAD, BIDADI HOBLI, RAMANAGARA TALUK, BANGALORE DISTRICT, PERTAINING TO LOAN ACCOUNT OF U & I SYSTEM DESIGN LIMITED.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
O R D E R The petitioner is before this Court seeking issue of mandamus to direct the respondents to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 31.05.2016 as at Annexure-A and complete the sale process pursuant to the letter dated 12.01.2016 relating to the property which is referred to in the petition.
2. The petitioner having taken part in the auction conducted by the respondents is stated to have made the highest offer and in that view, the petitioner is before this Court seeking that the respondents be directed to complete the transaction by issuing the sale certificate.
3. During the pendency of this petition, the petitioner has taken a decision not to press for the relief as sought in the petition.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that he has instructions from his client to seek for a direction to the respondents to refund the amount which has been deposited by him with the respondents as part of sale consideration. In that regard, since at this point the petitioner does not choose to press for the relief sought herein and if the petitioner desires that the amount be refunded, to that extent, liberty is reserved to the petitioner to make an appropriate representation to the respondents requesting for refund of the amount.
5. If such representation is made, the respondents shall take note of the same, take a decision on the same to refund the amount to the petitioner.
In terms of the above, the petition stands disposed of.
In the nature of disposal, no specific orders are necessary on I.A.No.1/2016, though learned counsel for the applicant in I.A.No.1/2016 has also been heard.
Sd/- JUDGE hrp/bms