Karnataka High Court: B. Veerappa, J. while disposing of this petition directed that the impugned order should not be given effect to.
The petitioner had sought for a writ for certiorari for quashing the order permitting the respondent-Bank to take physical possession of the schedule property for non-payment of due amount Rs 1.27 crore.
Counsel for the Petitioner, Sandhya U. Prabhu, submitted that the petitioner has an alternative remedy of statutory appeal under Section 17 of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Securities Interest Act, 2002 against the impugned order which was not filed then.
The possession of the property was allowed with the help of the police. It was contended by the petitioner that he had already paid Rs 1.06 crore.
The Court observed that the caveator-respondent after given so many opportunities did not appear before the Court and the above payment by the petitioner was also not disputed. The Court, in the interest of justice, gave a reasonable opportunity to the petitioner to avail alternative remedy of appeal. [John Nesa Kumar v. Canara Bank, 2019 SCC OnLine Kar 2360, decided on 06-11-2019]
