Dismissed

M/S Saurabh General and Kirana Store v. State of U P and 2 Others

Allahabad HC12 Oct 2018WRIC/34746/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court dismissed a writ petition filed by a loan defaulters challenging the SARFAESI Act proceedings. The court noted no appeal was filed against the impugned order and found no legal provision to enable selling assets. Thus, no good reason was seen to grant reliefs.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition was dismissed; no relief was granted to the petitioner.

M/S Saurabh General and Kirana Store Vs State of U P and 2 Others — Allahabad HC (2018) — LawSathi Research

¶1

Court No. - 39 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 34746 of 2018

¶2

Petitioner :- M/S Saurabh General And Kirana Store Respondent :- State Of U P And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Kamlendra Singh Jadaun Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Brahmanand Singh

¶3

Hon'ble B. Amit Sthalekar,J. Hon'ble Surya Prakash Kesarwani,J.

¶4

Heard Sri Kamlendra Singh Jadaun, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri B.N. Singh, learned counsel for the respondent no. 3 and learned Standing Counsel for respondents no. 1 & 2.

¶5

This writ petition has been filed praying for following reliefs:

¶6

i. Issue a writ, order, or direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding the respondents not to adopt any coercive measure against the petitioner and allow him to sell his house in open market value so that he will pay entire amount of respondent no.3.

¶7

ii. Issue any suitable order or direction to which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the interest of justice.

¶8

iii. Award the costs of this writ petition in favour of petitioners.

¶9

From the averments made in the writ petition it appears that the petitioner took a loan of Rs. 10 lakhs. He defaulted in the payment of the loan. Consequently the respondent no. 3 - Bank initiated proceedings under Section 13 (2) of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (in short 'the SARFAESI Act') and an order under Section 13 (4) of the SARFAESI Act has been passed on 8.11.2017.

¶10

On being asked the learned Counsel for the petitioner states that no appeal was filed to challenge the order dated 8.11.2017 under Section 13 (4) of the SARFAESI Act.

¶11

No provision of law could be placed before us, by the learned counsel for the petitioner which may enable the petitioner to sell his secured assets.

¶12

In the facts and circumstances of the present case we do not find any good reason to grant reliefs as prayed by the petitioner. Therefore, we do not find any merit in this writ petition.

¶13

In view of the aforesaid, the writ petition is dismissed.

¶14

Order Date :- 12.10.2018 Vandana

M/S Saurabh General and Kirana Store v. State of U P and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S Saurabh General and Kirana Store v. State of U P and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/S Gayatri Associates Developer Wonder City Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Cma Cgm Logistics Park (Dadri) Pvt. Ltd. Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Jay Kumar Vs State of U P and 3 Others

Brajesh Kumar Singh Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

M/S Diamond Refractories and Another Vs State of U.P. and 5 Others

M/S Aditya Traders and Another Vs Corporation Bank and Another