Tripura High Court
Sri Utpal Datta vs The State Bank Of India on 19 December, 2018
Bench: Sanjay Karol, Arindam Lodh
Page 1 of 3
HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA
AGARTALA
WP(C) No.1038 of 2018
1. Sri Utpal Datta, S/o. late Upendra Chandra Datta, resident of
Lake Road, Haradhan Sangha, Krishnanagar, Agartala, Tripura
West-799001.
2. Smt. Rupa Datta, W/o. Sri Utpal Datta, resident of Lake Road,
Haradhan Sangha, Krishnanagar, Agartala, Tripura West-799001.
-------Petitioner(s)
Versus
1. The State Bank of India, Agartala Branch, Branch Code
(00002), Melarmath, Agartala, Tripura West-799001, represented
by Assistant General Manager.
2. The Authorized Officer, State Bank of India, Agartala Branch,
Melarmath, Agartala, Tripura West-799001.
3. The State Bank of India, Constituted Processing Cell, 5 th Floor,
Wing "A", Local Head Office, North Eastern Circle, G.S. Road,
Dispur, Guwahati-781006, Assam.(Represented by authorized
officer).
------Respondent(s)
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. N. Majumder, Advocate. For Respondent(s) : Mr. A.L. Saha, Advocate.
HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. SANJAY KAROL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARINDAM LODH Order 19/12/2018 Petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs :
"(i) Issue Writ in the nature of certiorari calling upon the respondents to show cause as to why the notice vide No.AGM/62/164 dated 04-07-2018 issued by respondent No.2 to petitioner No.1 (Annexure-F) should not be set aside and quashed.
(ii) Issue Writ in the nature of certiorari calling upon the respondents to show cause as to why the notice vide No.AGM/62/165 dated 04-07-2018 issued by respondent No.2 to petitioner No.2 (Annexure-G) should not be set aside and quashed.Page 2 of 3
(iii) Issue Writ in the nature of certiorari calling upon the respondents to show cause as to why the notice vide No.AGM/62/397 dated 07-09-2018 issued by respondent No.2 to petitioner No.1 (Annexure-J) should not be set aside and quashed.
(iv) Issue Writ in the nature of certiorari calling upon the respondents to show cause as to why the notice vide No.AGM/62/396 dated 07-09-2018 issued by respondent No.2 to petitioner No.2 (Annexure-K), should not be set aside and quashed.
(v) Issue Writ in the nature of Mandamus calling upon the respondents to dispose of the objection dated 05-09-2018 (Annexure-I) submitted by petitioner No.1 to respondent No.2 before proceeding against the petitioners in accordance with SARFAESI Act.
(vi) In the interim to stay the proceeding initiated by the respondents against the petitioners under the relevant act.
(vii) Pass any other relief/reliefs which Your Lordships may deem fit and proper."
After the matter was heard for some time, learned counsel for the writ petitioners, under instructions, prays that the writ petition be disposed of with a direction to the respondents to consider and decide the petitioners' representation pending consideration expeditiously and preferably within a period of two weeks from today.
Learned counsel for the respondent-bank has no objection to the same.
As such, the present petition is disposed of on the following mutually agreed terms :
(a) Petitioners' representation pending consideration shall positively be decided by the respondent-bank within a period of two weeks from today.Page 3 of 3
(b) It shall be open for the writ petitioners to place additional materials, if any, within a period of two days from today.
(c) Opportunity of hearing if so required and desired shall be afforded to the writ petitioners.
(d) Equally decision on the representation shall be communicated to the writ petitioners.
(e) Liberty is reserved to the petitioners to take recourse to such remedies as are otherwise available in accordance with law, if so required and desired.
(f) All issues are left open.
Consequently, writ petition is disposed of in the aforesaid terms.
(ARINDAM LODH), J (SANJAY KAROL), CJ Dipesh