Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2013 (5) TMI 507

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... sed by the petitioner contending that, the proceedings pursued by the respondent Bank are per se wrong and illegal in all respects, also challenging the power and competency of the respondent Bank itself, to have pursued the proceedings. 3. It is stated that, the petitioner had availed a loan from the earstwhile Lord Krishna Bank Ltd creating security interest over the property. Apart from the loan availed by the petitioner from the Bank, other similarly situated persons, including the partners of the firm had also availed some loans and different items of properties were offered as security, over which security interest was created. It is brought on record that, in the course of the proceedings, Lord Krishna Bank was taken over by the Cen .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... titioners were relegated to avail the statutory remedy against the sale notice, within two weeks and to enable them to pursue such exercise, the confirmation of sale, if any, was ordered to be kept in abeyance till 15/03/2006. Being aggrieved of the said verdict, the said writ petitioners filed W.A.499/2006 and after considering the merits, the Division Bench observed that, no error was to be noted in respect of the judgement passed and thus declined interference, however, intercepting the sale for a period of 'two months', to enable the appellants to pursue the alternate remedy. It is brought to the notice of this Court that, pursuant to the disposal of the appeal, first petitioner/first appellant filed a securitisation application, wherei .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... s also pointed out that, the cause of action is a fresh one and the same has not become final, by virtue of the various proceedings - because of the pendency of the issue before the Tribunal, as well as Ext.P8 writ petition before this Court. 8. The learned counsel for the respondent Bank submits that, the writ petition itself is not maintainable, either on facts or in law. It is asserted that, the Bank has complied with all the requirements under the statute and the challenge raised against the proceedings is quite wrong and unfounded. It is also stated that, the establishment is not a running concern and the same is 'locked out'. Learned counsel further submits that, many an effort was taken to have the issue settled somehow or the other .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... propriate proceedings before the DRT, as borne by Ext.P4 judgement. The said judgement has been upheld by the Division Bench vide Ext.P5, though granting some breathing time, intercepting the sale, to pursue such exercise before the DRT . The 6th defendant in the O.A. i.e. the second petitioner to Ext.P4/P5 verdicts has preferred S.A. 96/2008, wherein an interim order of stay is stated as passed by the Tribunal. Though similar S.A. was preferred by the other petitioner i.e. the Managing Director of the petitioner Company, as borne by Ext.P7, for non-remittance of the requisite court fees, it was not duly numbered, which in turn is sought to be challenged by filing Ext.P8 petition W.P.(C) No.33453/06 before this Court. To put it short, the c .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... n is to arise only on proceeding with steps under Section 13(4). At the time of filing the writ petition, admittedly, the proceedings were in respect of challenge raised against the notice issued under Section 13(2). As such, the writ petition was pre-mature. It is now stated that further proceedings have been pursued by filing a petition under Section 14 before the concerned CJM Court, leading to an order and consequential notice issued by Advocate Commissioner (produced as Ext.P14 along with I.A. No.8374/12). But, here again, the question is maintainability and the jurisdiction. In view of the law declared by the Apex Court as mentioned hereinbefore and so also in view of the verdicts passed by this Court by way of Exts.P4 and P5, both .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates