Disposed

Mr. Sabhapathy Krishnamurthy Sharma, Hyderabad v. the Branch Manager, Canara Bank, and Another

Telangana HC16 Dec 2021WP/21354/2005

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court vacated an interim order preventing a bank from recovering dues due to a long lapse of time and lack of instructions. The Court permitted the bank to take fresh legal steps for recovery while reserving the petitioner's remedy under Section 17 of the SARFAESI Act.

What did the court decide?

Vacated the interim order dated 30.09.2005 and permitted the bank to take fresh steps for recovery of dues under law.

Mr. Sabhapathy Krishnamurthy Sharma, Hyderabad Vs the… — Banking and Recovery | Telangana HC (2021)

¶1

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶2

THURSDAY, THE SIXTEENTH DAY OF DECEIMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY ONE

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE UJJAL BHUYAN AND

¶5

THE HON'BLE SMT JUSTICE P. MADHAVI DEVI

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO: 213s4 OF 200s

¶7

Between:

¶8

Mr. Sabhapathy Knshnamurthy Sharma, S/o. Laxmana Sharma, Occ: purohit, No.2-2-485, Amberpet, Hyderabad,

¶9

...pETt,oNER

¶10

AND

¶11

The Branch I.4anager, The Canara Bank Seizure and Enforcement Cell R&L, Section Opp. Shanthi Theatre, Naryanguda, Hyderabad.

¶12

The Station House Officer, P.S,.Amberpet, Hyderabad.

¶13

.RESPONDENTS

¶14

Petition under Article 226 of lhe Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a writ of ltrlandamus declaring the action of the respondent in taking possession of petitioners property bearing No.2-2-4851 B.C.D. in Sy.No.1 Amberpet Hyderabad without following rule 4 and rule 8⁽¹ ) of Security rnterest Enforcement Act 2002 as illegal contrary to law

¶15

l.A. NO: 1 OF 2005(WPMP. NO: 2736'1 OF 2005)

¶16

Petition under Section^'1 51 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be^pleased issue a direction to the respondents not to dispossess the petitioner from the^property bearing No.2-2-485lB.C.D. in Sy.No.1 Amberpet Hyderabad Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI J. C. FRANCIS

¶17

Counsel for Respondent No. 1: SRI DEEPAK BHATTACHARJEE

¶18

Counsel for Respondent No. 2: GP FOR HOME

¶19

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶20

HON0URABLE SRI JUSTICE UJJAL BH U-AN AND

¶21

HONOI'RABLE SMTJUSTICE P. MADHAVI DEVI

¶22

W.P.No.21354 of 2005

¶23

Ofdef: (Per h^,n'bte Si Jwticc Uijal Bh raa)

¶24

Heard Mr. J.C. Francis, learned counscl For the petitioner, and Mr. D, epali Bhattacharjee, learned Standing Counsel for respondent i .1o.1/Canara Bank.

¶25

This \ /rit I)ctition has been fiied undcr ..\rticlc 226 of thc Consnrution of lndia scekir-rg a declaration thar t rc :rc[ion of 111 respondent No.1 , takine posscssion oI rhc petitioner's properry, is Lllcgal bcins vlolatir-e of ltr"rlcs 4 ancl B (l) ol the Securigv Intc'cs t (1,)n fr >rccment) Rules, 2(X)2.

¶26

The d, tails of the petitioner's propctv (schedule properh) is as under:

¶27

"No.2-. -185/ll.O.D. in Sy.No.1, Amberpet, I Ivdt'ral;acl"

¶28

From he supporting affidar.it, rve [r-rd thzrt a notrce undcr Section 13Q), of the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and F oforcement of Securi8 Interest r\ct, 2002 (for short 'the SARFAI SI Act') s'as issued to thc pcriuor.rcr br respor.rdent No.1 on 01.(^(r.2004, stating rhat amounts of lts.4,2 1.522.00 and Rs.4,06,91 1.( ) respcctivcl, rverc oursranclins as on 0I 11.2003

¶29

¶30

Therefore, b1. the said notice, petitioner was called upon to pay the outstarldir.rg dues together with funher interest within 60 days, failing rvhich, it rvas stated that being the secured creditor, responder.rr No.1 rvould initiate action under Section 13(4) of the SAITF,{F,SI \Ct.

¶31

Wc find lrom the materials ou rccord that there is a pleader's noticc datcd 20.09.2005, on bei.ralf of the petitioner and addresscd t() thc rlutllorized officcr of rcspondent No.1 not to dispossess thc pctitioner from the schedulc property.

¶32

'I'his Court, by order dated 30.09.2005, admitted the Writ Petition for l.rearing and passed an interim order as prayed for.

¶33

When thc matter was last listed r:n 09.11.2021, learned counsel for the pet.itioner sought for time to obtain instructions. 1'oday, w'l-ren thc matter is calied upon, learned counsel submits that he has not received anv instructions.

¶34

In viciv of abor,c and considering the long iapse of time, \,e are of thc lict that respondcnt No.1/(ianara llank may be pcrrnittcd to tirkc lrcsh stcps in accordance with law for recovery of the dues, i( in thc meanrvhile, tl-rc outstanding dues have not yet been paid bv tl.re petitioner. It the pet-itior-rer is aggrieved by any such actior-r, that may be taken bl, respondent No.1, it rvould be open to thc pctitioner to avail his remedy under Section 17 of

¶35

¶36

the SAI{1.'AliSI . 'ct.^{(ionscqucntlr',} we vacare thc rntenrn ordcr

¶37

passed oll 30 )9.2005, lcar-ing rt opcn to rcsp<;ndent No.1 /Canara Bar .k to take such steps for reco.en' of due s as are permissible in lar', .

¶38

Wdt Pcdtit n is disposcd of. Related intcrim application

¶39

stands disposed r L

¶40

No costs.

¶41

¶42

SD/.P.PADMANABHA REDDY ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ,TRUE CoPY/, (.X.

¶43

SECTIbN OFFICER

¶44

To,

¶45

The Branch Manager, l-he Canara Bank Seizure and Enforcement Cell R&L, Section Opp. Shanthi^- heatre, Naryanguda, Hyderabad. 2. One CC to Sri J C Frar cis Advocate [OPUC] a One CC to Sri Deepak Bhattacharjee Advocate [OPUC]

¶46