Gujarat High Court High Court

Corporation vs Reconstruction on 8 March, 2010

Gujarat High Court
Corporation vs Reconstruction on 8 March, 2010
Author: Mr.S.J.Mukhopadhaya,&Nbsp;Honourable Mr.Justice Kureshi,&Nbsp;
   Gujarat High Court Case Information System 

  
  
    

 
 
    	      
         
	    
		   Print
				          

  


	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	


 


	 

SCA/13093/2009	 2/ 2	ORDER 
 
 

	

 

IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
 

 


 

SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 13093 of 2009
 

=========================================


 

GUJARAT
INDUSTRIAL INVESTMENT 

 

CORPORATION
LIMITED - Petitioner(s)
 

Versus
 

INVENT
ASSETS SECURITATION & 

 

RECONSTRUCTION
PRIVATE & 5 - Respondent(s)
 

=========================================
 
Appearance : 
MR
S.N. SHELAT, SR. COUNSEL with MR  RD DAVE
for Petitioner(s) :
1, 
NOTICE SERVED BY DS for Respondent(s) : 1 - 6. 
MR AS VAKIL
for Respondent(s) : 1, 
MR S.N. SOPARKAR, SR. COUNSEL with MR  PR
NANAVATI for Respondent(s) : 3, 
MS NALINI S LODHA for
Respondent(s) : 6, 
=========================================
 
	  
	 
	  
		 
			 

CORAM
			: 
			
		
		 
			 

HONOURABLE
			THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. S.J. MUKHOPADHAYA
		
	
	 
		 
		 
			 

and
		
	
	 
		 
		 
			 

HONOURABLE
			MR.JUSTICE AKIL KURESHI
		
	

 

					Date
: 08/03/2010 

 

ORAL
ORDER

(Per
: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. S.J. MUKHOPADHAYA)

Actions
have been taken by the Bank under Section 13(4) of the Securitization
& Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security
Interest Act, 2002. Against interim order, the auction purchaser
moved this Court in Letters Patent Appeal No. 2472 of 2009, wherein
this Court passed following order on 11.1.2010.

Heard
learned counsel for the appellant and the respondent-writ petitioner.

It
is not in dispute that the Bank has taken steps under section 13(4)
of the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and
Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 [for short, ‘the SARFAESI
Act’] and there is a Forum of appeal against such action under
section 17 of the Act. Therefore, this Court does not interfere in
such matter under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

We
are informed that Special Civil Application No.13093 of 2009 is
pending and is likely to be listed for hearing before the learned
Single Judge on 18.1.2010.

We
are of the view that the appellant should bring the aforesaid facts
to the notice of the learned Single Judge, so that the
respondent-writ petitioner can prefer an appeal under Section 17 of
the SARFAESI Act.

Letters
Patent Appeal and Civil Application stand disposed of .

Today
the aforesaid Special Civil Application has been listed. In view of
the observations made in Appeal, we are not inclined to interfere
with the action taken by the bank under Section 13(4) of the
Securitization Act, but give liberty to the petitioner to prefer
appeal under Section 17 of the Securitization Act. The Debt Recovery
Tribunal will decide the case on merits, if such appeal is preferred
within 3 weeks. The petitioner may also ask for interim relief
before the Tribunal.

With the above observation, writ petition stands disposed of.

(S.J.Mukhopadhaya,
C.J.)

(Akil
Kureshi, J.)

*/Mohandas

   

Top