Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 1, Cited by 12]

Calcutta High Court

Ratan Karmakar & Anr vs Union Bank Of India & Anr on 16 March, 2010

Author: Dipankar Datta

Bench: Dipankar Datta

ORDER SHEET

              IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
             CONSTITUTIONAL WRIT JURISDICTION
                       ORIGINAL SIDE

                        G. A. No. 10 of 2010
                       W. P. No.1344 of 2009


                                 RATAN KARMAKAR & ANR.
                                         Versus
                                UNION BANK OF INDIA & ANR.

 BEFORE:

 The Hon'ble Justice Dipankar Datta

 _______________________________________________________________
  Date: 16th March, 2010
  _______________________________________________________________

          This is an application for addition of party at the

 instance of the brother of the first petitioner.

          In the writ petition, the petitioners have questioned

 notices issued by the respondent-bank in exercise of power

conferred by the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002.

It is claimed by the applicant that in the event the writ petitioners fail to discharge their liability, he might be ousted from his present place of residence and since he is willing to clear 2 the dues of the bank, he must be allowed to participate in this proceeding.

Mr. Sen, learned Advocate appearing for the petitioners opposes the prayer for addition. However, he is candid enough to submit before the Court that the writ petitioners have not paid Rs.2 lakhs as directed by the order dated 5th February, 2010.

Learned Advocate for the bank is not in a position to apprise the Court the quantum of dues. He seeks some time to obtain instruction.

Since the writ petitioners have defaulted in payment of Rs.2 lakhs within the time specified in the order dated 5th February, 2010, the interim order is no longer in operation and, therefore, the bank shall be entitled to proceed against them in accordance with law. However, since in the process the applicant may be ousted, this Court considers it necessary to implead him as an additional respondent in this petition.

The application for addition of party stands allowed. The writ petition shall be listed on 23rd February, 2010 under the heading `Court Application' when the learned Advocate, appearing for the bank shall apprise the Court the exact quantum of dues.

3

Urgent photostat certified copy of this order be made available to the parties, if applied for, upon compliance of all requisite formalities.

( Dipankar Datta, J. ) AKGoswami