IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 28th DAY OF MARCH 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE WRIT PETITION NO.22161 OF 2018 (GM-RES) BETWEEN:
1. VENKATESH JANARDAN AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS NO.68, FIRST FLOOR, SRINIVAS NILAYA, 11TH CROSS, PENNFIELD GARDENS, BANGALORE - 560094.
2. MRS ASHA W/O VENKATESH JANARDANA AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS NO.68, FIRST FLOOR, SRINIVAS NILAYA, 11TH CROSS, PENNFIELD GARDENS, BANGALORE - 560094. … PETITIONERS (By Mr. K L SHREENEVASA, ADV.) AND:
1. DISTRICT COMMISSIONER & DISTRICT MAGISTRATE AT BANGALORE BANGALORE DISTRICT BANGALORE – 560001.
2. TATA CAPITAL HOUSING FINANCE LIMITED OFFICE AT NO 82/1, GROUND FLOOR, KRISHNA TOWER, BANGALORE - 560025 REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORIZED OFFICER, MR SAJU K V S/O VARGHESE K P AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS. … RESPONDENTS (By Mr. Y D HARSHA, AGA FOR R1, Mr. JAI PATIL, ADV. FOR R-2) - - -
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENTS NOT TO INITIATE ANY PRECIPITATORY ACTION IN PURSUANCE TO THE ORDER PASSED IN MISCELLANEOUS RECOVERY [BANK]C.R.23/2017-18 ON 9.4.2018 BY D.C. RESPONDENT NO.1 BANGALORE DISTRICT VIDE ANNEXURE-B AND ALSO LETTER DTD:14.5.2018 HAVING REFERENCE VIDE ANNEXURE-C OF R-2 WITH A DIRECTION NOT TO TAKE POSSESSION OF THE PROPERTY MENTIONED VIDE ANNEXURE-B AND ETC.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-
ORDER Sri.K.L.Shreenevasa, learned counsel for the petitioners.
Sri.Y.D.Harsha, learned Additional Government Advocate for the respondent No.1.
Sri.Jai Patil, learned counsel for the respondent No.2.
2. The petition is admitted for hearing. With consent of the learned counsel for the parties, the same is heard finally.
3. In this petition, the petitioner inter alia seeks for a direction to the respondents not to initiate any precipitatory action in pursuance to the order passed in Miscellaneous Recovery (Bank) C.R.23/2017-18 on 9.4.2018 by D.C. Bangalore District - respondent No.1 vide Annexure-B and also letter dated 14.5.2018 having reference vide Annexure-C of respondent No.2 with a direction not to take possession of the property mentioned vide Annexure-B.
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 Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’ for short).
5. 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, if any, shall continue. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits.
Accordingly, the petition is disposed of.
5. In view of the disposal of the writ petition, the pending interlocutory application does not survive for consideration and is accordingly disposed of.
Sd/- JUDGE RV