IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF APRIL 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE WRIT PETITION NOs.3307 OF 2019 AND 5772 OF 2019 (GM-DRT) BETWEEN:
1. SRI VENKATESH, S/O MUNIKRISHNAPPA & SMT.CHANNAMMA, AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS, R/O SEETHA KEMPANAHALLI, KAKOLU POST – 560 089, HESARAGHATTA HOBLI, BENGALURU NORHT ADDL.TALUK.
2. SRI PRASANNA KUMAR S.M, S/O MUNIKRISHNAPPA & SMT.CHANNAMMA, AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS, R/O SEETHA KEMPANAHALLI, KAKOLU POST – 560 089, HESARAGHATTA HOBLI, BENGALURU NORTH ADDL. TALUK.
… PETITIONERS (BY MR.VARAPRASAD K, ADV.) AND:
1. KAVERI GRAMEEN BANK, RAJANUKUNTE BRANCH, RAJANUKUNTE – 560 064, BENGALURU NORTH TALUK, REPRESENTED BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER.
HAVING ITS HEAD OFFICE AT: NO.CA20. VIJAYANAGAR, 2ND STAGE, MYSURU – 570 017.
2. THE RECOVERY OFFICER-I, DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL – 1, NO.4, HAYES ROAD, SHANTHALA NAGAR, RICHMOND TOWN, BENGALURU – 560 025.
(BY R.VENKATA REDDY, ADV. FOR R1 R2 SERVED) … RESPONDENTS - - -
THESE WRIT PETITIONS ARE FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 5.2.18 PASSED BY THE LEARNED PRESIDING OFFICER, DEBT RECOVERY TRIBUNAL, BENGALURU, IN O.A.NO.1861/2015 VIDE ANNEXURE-H AND THE SALE PROCLAMATON DATED 26.12.2018 ISSUED BY THE R-2 VIDE ANNEXURE-M AND ETC.
THESE WRIT PETITIONS COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-
ORDER Mr.Varaprasad K., learned counsel for the petitioner.
Mr.R.Venkata Reddy, learned counsel for the respondent No.1.
2. The writ petition is admitted for hearing.
With consent of the learned counsel for the parties, the same is heard finally.
3. In this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has assailed the validity of the impugned Order under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts Due to Bank’s and Financial Institution Act, 1993 (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 petitioner has a remedy of filing an appeal under Section 20 of the Act before the Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal. For the aforementioned reasons, the petition is disposed of with a liberty that in case the petitioner avail of the remedy provided to them under Section 20 of the Act within four 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 petitioner and shall decide the appeal. Till then, the interim order shall continue provided the conditions mentioned in the interim order are complied with.
With the aforesaid liberty, the petition is disposed of.
Sd/- JUDGE SS