Telangana High Court
Vedula Venkata Ramana vs Yes Bank Limited on 2 February, 2022
Author: P.Sree Sudha
Bench: P.Sree Sudha
HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE UJJAL BHUYAN
AND
HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE P. SREE SUDHA
W.P.No.5664 of 2022
Order: (Per Hon'ble Sri Justice Ujjal Bhuyan)
Heard Mr. G.Dinesh Kumar, learned counsel for the
petitioner.
2. By filing this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of
India, petitioner seeks quashing of possession notice
dated 27.01.2022 issued by the respondent under Section 13(12) of
the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (for short 'the SARFAESI Act').
3. From a perusal of the impugned possession notice, we find that outstanding dues of the petitioner as on 27.09.2021 has been quantified at Rs.2,86,92,133.00.
4. Upon hearing learned counsel for the petitioner and on due consideration, we are of the view that petitioner has got an adequate and efficacious remedy under Section 17 of the SARFAESI Act.
5. If the petitioner files a securitisation application under sub-section (1) of Section 17 of the SARFAESI Act before the jurisdictional Debts Recovery Tribunal, within a period of thirty days from today, and further deposits 15% of the outstanding dues ::2::
as on today with the respondent within the aforesaid period of thirty days, respondent shall not take further steps pursuant to the impugned possession notice dated 27.01.2022. However, if there is any default on the part of the petitioner either in filing the securitisation application or in making the deposit as above, it will be open to the respondents to proceed further against the petitioner in accordance with law.
6. Writ Petition is, accordingly, disposed of. Related interim application is also disposed of.
7. No costs.
__________________ UJJAL BHUYAN , J _________________ P.SREE SUDHA, J Date: 02-02-2022 LUR