Mrs. Nisha Prakash v. The Punjab National Bak Housing Finance Ltd
Case at a glance
Outcome
Dismissed
In view of the above reasons, this writ petition is dismissed
Provisions considered
Key paragraphs
- Para 44. In view of the above reasons, this writ petition is dismissed granting liberty to the petitioner to approach the Debts Recovery Tribunal under Section 17 of the SARFAESI Act, 2002 for appropriate relief. Consequent to this order, the miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall…
Judgment
24-10-2013 Between: Mrs. Nisha Prakash ..petitioner
The Punjab National Bak Housing Finance Ltd. Rep. by its Manager, Saifabad, Hyderabad. ..Respondent The Court made the following Order:
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A.V.SESHA SAI W.P.No.5703 of 2007 Oral Order: This writ petition is filed seeking a writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction to declare the action of the respondent—Bank under Sections 13 and 14 of the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assistance and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (for short “SARFAESI Act”) as illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional and to declare the order of the Court of the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Nampally, Hyderabad passed in Crl.M.P.No.68 of 2006, dated 05-01-2007 as contrary to law and to direct the respondent—Bank not to sell away the Flat No.404, Metropalmgrove Apartments, Somajiguda, Hyderabad without following due process of law, enabling the petitioner to object to the same.
This Court on 23-03-2007 granted interim order in W.P.M.P.No.7275 of 2007, which reads as follows:
Any sale of Flat No.404, Metroplamgrove Apartments, Somajiguda, Hyderabad, pursuant to the sale notice issued by the respondent—Bank dated 25-02-2007 shall be subject to further orders to be passed in this writ petition. The respondent—Bank is directed to intimate the prospective bidder at the public auction, as to the pendency of this writ petition. Learned counsel for the petitioner is permitted to take out personal notice to the respondent and file proof of service. Notice. List after ten days.
Under Section 17 of the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assistance and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (for short “SARFAESI Act”), any aggrieved person has to approach the Debts Recovery Tribunal for redressal of grievance. In view of the law laid down by the Honourable Supreme Court in the case of MARDIA CHEMICALS LTD. v. UNION OF INDIA and this Court in the case of B.T.S.ESTATE (P) LTD., VISAKHAPATNAM v. SBI, DWARAKANAGAR reported in 2009 (1) ALD 780 (DB); in the case of SRIMANENI RAMESH BABU v. GOVT. OF INDIA reported in 2011 (5) ALD 464 (DB) and in the case of SESHA SAILA POWER AND ENGINEERING PVT. LTD. v. SBI, RAIPUR reported in 2012 (3) ALD 537, the writ petition is not maintainable.
Operative part
In view of the above reasons, this writ petition is dismissed granting liberty to the petitioner to approach the Debts Recovery Tribunal under Section 17 of the SARFAESI Act, 2002 for appropriate relief. Consequent to this order, the miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand dismissed. No costs. _______________ A.V.SESHA SAI, J. 24-10-2013 Murthy
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: In view of the above reasons, this writ petition is dismissed
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Reconstruction of Financial Assistance and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002; SARFAESI Act, 2002 — s. 17.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Andhra Pradesh High Court, on 24 Oct 2013. The bench was A V SESHA SAI.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.