Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
SCA/1589/2010 2/ 2 ORDER
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 1589 of 2010
=========================================================
HASMUKHBHAI
BHANJIBHAI PARMAR - Petitioner(s)
Versus
VIJAYA
BANK & 4 - Respondent(s)
=========================================================
Appearance :
SV
RAJU ASSOCIATES for
Petitioner(s) : 1,
None for Respondent(s) : 1 -
5.
=========================================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE JAYANT PATEL
Date
: 19/02/2010
ORAL
ORDER
1. The
petitioner by this petition has challenged the public notice Anneuxre
G issued by the respondent bank dated 18.01.2010 for auction of
the flat and the petitioner has alternatively prayed to direct
respondent no.1 bank to inform in writing to all the bidders as well
as the successful bidder that property in question is subject to the
rights, title and interest of the petitioner.
2. Heard
Mr. Jayprakash Umath for the petitioner. The contention raised on
behalf of the petitioner is that the petitioner under the agreement
to sell has paid full consideration and based on the same the
possession was handed over to the petitioner. Thereafter, the bank
under the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and
Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (hereinafter referred to
as ‘the Securitization Act’) has taken over the possession, therefore
this petition.
3. Even
if the petitioner is claiming any interest in the property, once the
measure is already taken under Section 13(4) of the Securitization
Act, the petitioner has the remedy available before the Debts
Recovery Tribunal under Section 17 of the Securitization Act. If the
petitioner is to ventilate the rights against the original owner, the
petitioner has to resort to appropriate civil proceedings. Neither of
the remedy has been exhausted. Hence, no case is made out for
interference, therefore rejected.
[JAYANT
PATEL, J.]
jani
Top