M/s. Poly Petro Chem Pvt. Ltd. & 4 ors v. The Shamrao Vithal Co-op. Bank Ltd. & 2 ors
Case at a glance
Provisions considered
Judgment
Mr. S.M. Gorwadkar for the Petitioners. Mr. A.S. Kamat i/b M/s.V. Deshpande & Co. for the Respondent No.1. Mr. S.N. Patil, AGP, for the Respondent No.3. CORAM : A.M. KHANWILKAR & R.M. SAVANT, JJ. DATED : 21ST APRIL, 2010 P.C. :
Heard counsel for the parties. This Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India takes exception to the order passed by the District Magistrate dated 31st March, 2010 in Application No.132 of 2008 in terms of section 13(4) of the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002. Consequent to the hearing and the observations made by the court during the course of hearing, in deference to the 2 said observations, counsel for the Petitioner submits that the court may dispose of this Writ Petition, without recording any reasons, on the following terms : (i) The order impugned in this Petition may be confirmed. (ii) The Respondents may be permitted to take physical possession in respect of factory premises and symbolic possession of the residential premises as the residential premises are presently occupied by tenants. Counsel appearing for the Respondent-bank, however, submits that it is open to the Respondent-bank to take physical possession of even residential premises. We express no opinion on that aspect as that is a question which can be agitated before the DRT in proceedings under section 17 of the Act. (iii) The Petitioner shall hand over possession of the subject property within two weeks from today, without prejudice to their rights and contentions which may be available to the Petitioners to be agitated in the proceedings 3 under section 17 of the Act and/or proceedings already pending between the parties relating to recovery of loan amount. All questions in that behalf are left open. (iv) The Petitioners shall approach the DRT within two weeks from the date of handing over possession to the Respondent-bank. Till such time, the Respondent-bank will not take any further steps with regard to such property and would be entitled to proceed in terms of the order to be passed in the proposed proceedings to be instituted by the Petitioner under section 17 of the Act.
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.