Kishan Brother vs State Bank Of Patiala on 7 October, 2015

[Cites 3, Cited by 0]

Gujarat High Court

Kishan Brother vs State Bank Of Patiala on 7 October, 2015

Bench: Abhilasha Kumari

              C/SCA/15510/2015                                                   ORDER




                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD


                    SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 15510 of 2015

         ==========================================================
                             KISHAN BROTHER....Petitioner(s)
                                       Versus
                         STATE BANK OF PATIALA....Respondent(s)
         ==========================================================
         Appearance:
         MR AR GUPTA, ADVOCATE for the Petitioner(s) No. 1
         ADITYA A GUPTA, ADVOCATE for the Petitioner(s) No. 1
         MR ANIP A GANDHI, ADVOCATE for the Respondent(s) No. 1
         ==========================================================

                 CORAM: HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE ABHILASHA
                        KUMARI

                                    Date : 07/10/2015


                                     ORAL ORDER

1. The petitioner has approached this Court by filing this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and making the following prayers:

"(a) YOUR LORDSHIPS BE PLEASED to quash and set aside the Notice dated 14.09.2015 purportedly issued under Section 176 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872 by the Respondent at Annexure A (Colly) to this petition being illegal and in violation of Section 176 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872, being violative of the right to redeem under Page 1 of 4 HC-NIC Page 1 of 4 Created On Thu Oct 08 00:47:49 IST 2015 C/SCA/15510/2015 ORDER Article 300A and the principles of natural justice and to issue a writ of mandamus, certiorari or any other writ, direction or order to quash and set aside the aforesaid notices in the interest of justice.

(b) YOUR LORDSHIPS BE PLEASED to quash and set aside the public notice of auction dated 15.09.2015 under Section 176 issued by the Respondent at Annexure D to this petition in pursuance to the impugned notice dated 14.09.2015 being illegal and in violation of principles of natural justice, in violation of right of redemption to issue a writ of mandamus, certiorari or any other writ, direction or order to quash and set aside the aforesaid notice in the interest of justice.

(c) YOUR LORDSHIPS BE PLEASED to restrain Respondent and/or their agents, servants to take further steps qua the secured pledged assets in pursuance of the impugned notice of sale dated 14.09.2015 pending admission, hearing and final disposal of this petition.

(d) YOUR LORDSHIPS BE PLEASED pass such other and further orders, which may be deemed fit in the interest of justice."

2. After issuance of notice and grant of adinterim Page 2 of 4 HC-NIC Page 2 of 4 Created On Thu Oct 08 00:47:49 IST 2015 C/SCA/15510/2015 ORDER relief, the respondent State Bank of Patiala has filed the affidavit affirmed on 06.10.2015. In the said affidavit, it is stated that the Bank is withdrawing the impugned notice with a view to issuing a fresh notice, since the account of the petitioner has become NPA as on date. It is further stated that the Bank shall grant reasonable time to the petitioner.

3. Mr.Aditya A. Gupta, learned advocate for the petitioner, submits that one of the grounds raised in the petition, apart from a reasonable opportunity to respond to the impugned notice, was also to the effect that the Bank had not stated in the notice, the amount that the petitioner is liable to pay.

4. Anip A. Gandhi, learned advocate for the respondent Bank states that this amount would also be mentioned in the notice.

5. In view of the affidavit filed by the respondent Bank, the Bank shall withdraw the impugned notice dated 14.09.2015 with liberty to issue a fresh notice, in accordance with law, by intimating the petitioner Page 3 of 4 HC-NIC Page 3 of 4 Created On Thu Oct 08 00:47:49 IST 2015 C/SCA/15510/2015 ORDER in writing. The Bank shall grant the petitioner a reasonable opportunity to respond to the notice, that is thirty days from the date of the receipt of the notice by the petitioner. The amount that is due from the petitioner, as per the respondent Bank shall be clearly indicated in the notice.

6. In view of the above, the petition is disposed of, without entering into the merits of the case. Notice is discharged. The interim relief granted earlier stands vacated.

(SMT. ABHILASHA KUMARI, J.) piyush Page 4 of 4 HC-NIC Page 4 of 4 Created On Thu Oct 08 00:47:49 IST 2015

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Gujarat High Court