IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE WRIT PETITION NO.35853/2017 (GM-RES) BETWEEN:
M/s. Vision Minerals, Near Lions School Extension Area, Bagalkote-587 102, Karnataka, Rep. by its Proprietor, Sri. Ravindra S. Gachchinakatti.
(By Sri. Sandesh C. R, Advocate for Sri. Jayaraj D. S, Advocate) AND:
1. M/s. Corporation Bank, Mangaladevi Temple Road, Mangaluru-571 201, Rep. by Manager, 2. M/s. Corporation Bank, Bagalkote Main Branch, BBV Sangha Complex, College Road, Bagalkote-587 102, Rep. by Manager.
3. Sri. Gurappa, S/o. Shivanand Ninganur, Aged about 32 years, Occ: Business, … Petitioner R/o H.No.216, Rolli, Bilagi, Bagalkot District -587 116.
… Respondents (By Sri. V. B. Ravishankar, Advocate for C/R1 & R2) This Writ Petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, praying to quash the sale certificate dated 11.07.2017 issued by 2nd respondent Bank at Annex-A.
This Petition coming on for Orders, this day, the Court made the following:-
ORDER Sri. Sandesh C.R., learned counsel for Sri. Jayaraj D.S., learned counsel for the petitioner.
Sri. V.B. Ravishankar, learned counsel for respondent Nos.1 and 2.
Petition is admitted for hearing. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the same is heard finally.
2. In this petition, petitioner inter alia has assailed the validity of the order dated 06.07.2017 passed by the Debts Recovery Tribunal, Bengaluru.
3. When the matter was taken up today, learned counsel for the respondent-Bank submits that being aggrieved by the aforesaid order dated 06.07.2017 passed in S.A.No.500/2017, the petitioner has already filed an appeal namely, R.A.(S.A.)No.28/2018 before Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal.
4. The aforesaid submission made by learned counsel for the respondent-Bank is taken on record.
5. In view of the fact that the petitioner has already availed the statutory remedy available to him under the Recovery of Debts due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993, nothing survives for adjudication in this writ petition.
6. Accordingly, the same is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to prosecute the remedy available to him.
Sd/- JUDGE Mds/-