Smt P Padma vs The Authorized Officer on 11 March, 2019

[Cites 3, Cited by 3]

Karnataka High Court

Smt P Padma vs The Authorized Officer on 11 March, 2019

Bench: Alok Aradhe

                         1



 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

       DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF MARCH 2019

                      BEFORE

       THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE

 WRIT PETITION NOs.10675-10676 OF 2019 (GM-DRT)

BETWEEN:

1.   SMT P. PADMA
     AGED ABOUT 75 YEAS
     W/O PADMANABHAN
     NO.77/15-1, 7TH MAIN
     NANDA KUMAR LAYOUT
     RAMANJANEYA NAGAR
     BENGALURU-560 011.

2.   SRI PANNER SELVAM
     AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS
     S/O K PADMANABHAN
     NO.10, RBI COLONY
     JAYANAGAR,
     BENGALURU-560 011.
                                     ... PETITIONERS
(BY MR.VASANTH ADITHYA J, ADV.)

AND:

1.   THE AUTHORIZED OFFICER
     AXIS BANK, 55/5, 30TH CROSS
     13TH MAIN, 4TH BLOCK
     JAYANAGAR, BENGALURU-560 011.

2.   THE AUTHORIZED OFFICER
     INTERNATIONAL ASSET RECONSTRUCTION
     COMPANY PVT.LTD.
                         2



     2 BKG RETREAT, OLD NO.119
     NEW NO.26, GN CHETTY ROAD
     T NAGAR, CHENNAI-600 01.

3.   NEELIMA
     C/O IARC, A/508
     5TH FLOOR, 215 ATRIUM
     KANAKIA SPACES
     ANDHERI
     KURLA ROAD ANDHERI EAST
     MUMBAI-400069.

4.   THE RECOVERY OFFICER-1
     DRT I, BENGALURU
     LIC JEEVAN MANGAL BUILDING
     2ND FLOOR, NO.4
     RESIDENCY ROAD
     BENGALURU-560 025.
                                  ... RESPONDENTS

     THESE WRIT PETITIONS ARE FILED UNDER
ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA,
PRAYING TO STAY AND SET ASIDE THE EXECUTION OF
SALE PROCLAMATION (WARRANT) DCP NO.8847 IN OA
NO.229/2008 [ANNEXURE-K] DATED 20.2.2019 ISSUED
BY THE RECOVERY OFFICER DRT INCLUDING THE
ORDER DATED 8.12.2014 ANNEXURE-A IN THE OA SUIT
NO.229/2008 AND THE FIRST RECOVERY AS NULL AND
VOID TO SET ASIDE ALL THOSE RECOVERY STEPS
INCLUDING THE OA SUIT ORDER AND FOLLOW-UP
NOTICES ISSUED THEREON, INITIATED ILLEGALLY
BOTH BY THE RESPONDENT BANK AND THE IARC AS
ILLEGAL AND VOID AS THE FOREGOING DEMAND
NOTICES BY THE RECOVERY OFFICER WERE ISSUED
WITHOUT SERVING ORDER PASSED IN THE ABOVE OA
SUIT NO.229/2008 TO THE PETITIONER BORROWER
COMPANY AND OTHER DIRECTORS WHICH IS
MANDATORY AND ETC.
                             3



     THESE WRIT PETITIONS COMING ON FOR
PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE
THE FOLLOWING:-
                         ORDER

Sri.Vasanth Adithya.J, learned counsel for the petitioners.

Taking into account the order, which this Court proposes to pass, it is not necessary to issue notice to the respondents.

In these petitions, the petitioners have assailed the validity of Proclamation of Sale dated 20.02.2019.

2. When the matter was taken up today, learned counsel for the petitioners fairly submitted that being aggrieved by the aforesaid Proclamation of Sale, the petitioners have approached the Debts Recovery Tribunal, Bengaluru by filing an application under Section 17 of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002. However, the Debts Recovery Tribunal is not 4 adjudicating the objection preferred by the petitioners on merits.

3. In view of the aforesaid submission and in the facts of the case, the petitions are disposed of with a direction to the Debts Recovery Tribunal to consider and decide the application for stay preferred by the petitioners, if any, within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of the certified copy of the order passed today by a speaking order.

4. Till the application for stay is decided, no coercive action against the petitioners shall be taken.

5. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case.

Accordingly, the writ petitions are disposed of.

Sd/-

JUDGE dn/-

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Karnataka High Court