Gujarat High Court High Court

Charotar vs Shah on 5 March, 2010

Gujarat High Court
Charotar vs Shah on 5 March, 2010
Author: Mr.S.J.Mukhopadhaya,&Nbsp;Honourable Mr.Justice Kureshi,&Nbsp;
   Gujarat High Court Case Information System 

  
  
    

 
 
    	      
         
	    
		   Print
				          

  


	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	


 


	 

SCA/14213/2004	 2/ 2	ORDER 
 
 

	

 

IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
 

 


 

SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 14213 of 2004
 

With


 

SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 14214 of 2004
 

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


 

CHAROTAR
NAGRIK SAHAKARI BANK LTD. - Petitioner(s)
 

Versus
 

SHAH
PREMCHAND TARACHAND PARTNERSHIP FIRM & 2 - Respondent(s)
 

=============================================
 
Appearance : 
MR
DHARMESH V SHAH for Petitioner(s) : 1, 
RULE NOT RECD BACK for
Respondent(s) : 1, 3, 
MR BK DAMANI for Respondent(s) : 1, 
RULE
SERVED BY DS for Respondent(s) : 2, 
MR JB PARDIWALA for
Respondent(s) : 3, 
=============================================


 
	  
	 
	  
		 
			 

CORAM
			: 
			
		
		 
			 

HONOURABLE
			THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. S.J. MUKHOPADHAYA
		
	
	 
		 
			 

 

			
		
		 
			 

and
		
	
	 
		 
			 

 

			
		
		 
			 

HONOURABLE
			MR.JUSTICE AKIL KURESHI
		
	

 

 
 


 

Date
: 05/03/2010 

 

 
COMMON
ORAL ORDER

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

Petitioner-bank
issued notice under Section 13(2) of the Securitisation and
Reconstruction of Financial Assets & Enforcement of Security
Interest Act, 2002 (referred to as Securitisation Act for
short) against which the respondents preferred Civil Suit No.2169 and
2168 of 2004 in the City Civil Court of Ahmedabad. Learned counsel
for the petitioner referring to Section 34 of the Securitisation Act
submitted that the Civil Court has no jurisdiction to entertain the
suit / proceedings in respect of any matter for which the Debt
Recovery Tribunal is empowered under the Act to determine.

Learned
counsels appearing on behalf of the respondents do not dispute the
aforesaid fact that the Civil Court has no jurisdiction in the matter
and submitted that both the suits and Special Civil Applications have
become infructuous because the mortgaged property having been
auctioned during the pendency of the case.

In
view of the fact that the mortgaged property has already been
auctioned and sold by the petitioner-Bank, while we are not issuing
any direction on the respondents, we allow the petitioner to bring
this order to the notice of the learned Judge of the City Civil Court
hearing Civil Suit Nos.2168 and 2169 of 2004, to dispose of the suits
in view of provisions of Section 34 of the Securitisation Act.

Let
copy of this order be forwarded to the learned Principal Civil Judge,
City Civil Court of Ahmedabad for further necessary action.

Both
Special Civil Applications stand disposed of.

Rule
discharged. Interim relief granted earlier stands vacated.

(S.

J. MUKHOPADHAYA, C.J. )

(
AKIL KURESHI, J. )

kailash

   

Top