Review petition regarding a stay order on property auction notice filed before Sarfaesi Act Tribunal was disposed off as infructuous by the High Court of Telangana.
Review petition disposed off as infructuous; petitioner open to take permissible legal action.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
(Special Original J urisdiction)
FRIDAY,THE ELEVENTH DAY OF IVARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY TWO
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE SRIJUSTICE UJJAL BHUYAN
AND
THE HON'BLE SMT JUSTICE P.MADHAVI OEVI
(REVIEW ) l.A. NO.1 0F 2022
IN
WRIT PETITION NO: 31307 OF 2021
Between:
Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited, 6-3-1 109/1 , Navabharat Chambers. Rai B.havan Road, Somajiguda, Hyderabad-500 OB2, rep. by its AssocjaG' Vice President (Legal) &Authorised Officer
AND
...Review Petitione r/Responde nt No.1
Humayun Nagar, H yd era bad.
. RespondentiWrit Petitioner
... Res pondents/Respdt. Nos.2 & 3
Petition under section 114o'f cpc praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High court may be pleased to review the orders dated 01-12-2021 passed in w.p.No.31307 of 2021 by the Hon'ble Sri Justice UjjalBhuyan and the Hon'bleSmt.Justicep. Mad havi Devi.
This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the petition and the affidavit filed in support thereof and upon hearing the arguments of Sri N Sreedhar Reddy, Advocate for the Petitioner and Ms.p.K.Kalyani, Advocate for Sri Sri AmancharlaV. GopalaRao, Advocate for Respondent No.1 , N.RajeswaraRao, Asst. Sol.General for Respondent No.3 and none appeared for the Respondent No.2.
The Court made the following: ORDER
Heard Mr. N. Sreedhar Reddy, learned counsel for the review petitioner; lMs. Kalyani, learned counsel for respondent Nos.1 and 2; and tVlr. B. Mukherjee, learned counsel appearing on behalf of lVr.
NamavarapuRajeswaraRao, Iearned Assistant solicitor General of lndia, for respondent No.3.
This petition seeks review of final order dated 01 .12.2021 passed by this court in writ Petition No.31307 of 2021 which was instituted by respondent No.1 as the writ petitioner.
Relevant portion of the order dated 01 .12.2021 reads as under :
"3. By filing this petition under Article 226 of the constitution of lndia, petitioner seeks quashing of sale notice dated 11.11.2021 , whereby the secured asset is sought to be put to auction sale on 02.12.2021 .
6,Consideringtheabove,andhavingregardtothepeculiarsituationas mentioned above,there shatt be stay of the sale noticedated11.11.2021 for a period of thirty days fromtodaY.
T.ttisexpectedthatbythatllmeslepswouldbetakenforappointmentof Presiding Officersin the two Tribunals at Hyderabad'
B.lfforanyevent'thetwoofficescontinuetoremainvacant,petitionerwould be at liberty toapproachthe Court for extension of stay
while learned counselfor the review petitioner submits that the said order waspassedWithouthearingthereviewpetitionerandthereforeshouldbe modified by directingthe respondent No.1 / writ petitionerto pay at least 15% oftheoutstandingdues,Ms.Kalyani'learnedcounselforrespondentNo.l, submits that thesale notice dated 11.11.2021did not materialize because of thestaygrantedbythisCourt'Therefore,thereviewpetitionhasbecome infructuous.
While agreeingwiththe submissionmade by learned counsel for respondent No.1,it is clarifiedthat it wouldbe open to the review petitioner to now take suchaction as is permissible in law
The reviewpetitionis disposed of
SD/-K.VENKAIAH ASSIST T REGISTRAR ,TRUE COPY/i SECTIONOFFICER
To, '1 . One CC to Sri N.sreedharReddy Advocate[OPUC] - - -. 2. OneC 6 i" 3ir[r"'i"ir,arrav Gripatanao'Advocate[oPUC] 3. One C 6 i" s-r'it]irr"aiapunaiesGiiiao,nsst SolicitorGeneral[oPUC] 4. TwoC D Copies 5. Une > pare Copy IURC ) <Y SW)
HIGH COURT
DATED: 1110312022
e STAT E
.(
q
n
r.
0 { [l''i 202
oo
,./
-rti )i,
051.pr:f!,
ORDER
t.A.NO.1 0F 2022 IN
WP.No.31307 of 2021
DISPOSING OF THE REV.I.A, AS INFRUCTUOUS
/11.-
p4 r1f aaa/,
1 issue framed by the court
Whether a petition under Section 114 of CPC deserves review.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited
Basheer Vakil lvlohammed
Ujjal Bhuyan
P. Madhavi OEvi
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
