Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
SCA/4223/2011 2/ 2 ORDER
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 4223 of 2011
=================================================
VINODBHAI
ALIAS VINUBHAI MEGHJIBHAI NAVADIYA & OTHERS
Versus
STATE
BANK OF INDIA SMALL & MEDIUM ENTERPRISE CITY
=================================================
Appearance :
Ms Varsha
Brahmbhatt for the Petitioners
None for
Respondent(s) : 1,
=================================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. S.J. MUKHOPADHAYA
and
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE J.B.PARDIWALA
Date
: 04/04/2011
ORAL
ORDER
(Per
: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. S.J. MUKHOPADHAYA)
This writ
petition has been preferred by the petitioner against the physical
possession taken by the respondent – State Bank of India,
Surat for auction sale of the residential house of the petitioner.
One of the grounds taken is that amount of Rs.8,08,684 deposited by
the petitioner on 31st
March 2010 and 4th
September 2010 has not been adjusted towards the claim amount and
while the matter for One Time Settlement is pending before the Lok
Adalat, the present action has been taken.
Learned
counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner would contend that the
petitioner is ready to pay the outstanding dues in instalment if the
Bank reaches One Time Settlement. It appears that the Bank has
already moved before the Debt Recovery Tribunal, Ahmedabad under
Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial
Institutions Act, 1993 (“RDDB Act, 1993”, for short) and
Original Application
No.112 of 2010 is pending. In the meantime, the Bank has taken
steps under Section 13(4) of the Securitisation and Reconstruction
of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002
(“SARFAESI Act”, for short). In the circumstances,
there being a remedy before the Debt Recovery Tribunal, we are not
inclined to interfere with the matter at this stage under Article
226 of the Constitution of India.
The petitioner
is given liberty to approach the Bank for One Time Settlement. If
such application is made, the Bank, instead of going for auction
sale, may make settlement with the petitioner as per their scheme.
In addition to that or in alternative, the petitioner may also move
in appeal before the Debt Recovery Tribunal under Section 17 of the
SARFAESI Act if Act or the Rules framed thereunder has been
violated. Petitioner may also ask for interim relief from the Debt
Recovery Tribunal, which may consider the same in accordance with
law. Writ petition stands disposed of with the aforesaid
observation. Direct Service is permitted.
(S.J. Mukhopadhaya, CJ.)
(J.B.Pardiwala, J.)
*mohd
Top