LALITHA AND SRI SIDDARAJU S/O KEMPE GOWDA Vs. AUTHORISED OFFICER UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF SECURITISATION AND RECONSTRUCTION OF FINANCIAL ASSETS AND ENFORCEMENT OF SECURITY INTEREST ACT, 2002, KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL CO-OPERATIVE AND KARNATAKA STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Petitioners in W.P. No. 45382/2004 (GM RES) are before this Court in this intra -Court appeal claiming to be aggrieved by the order dated 04.03.2005. By the said order, the learned Single Judge has declined to grant the relief sought in the petition, but has reserved the liberty to approach the appropriate forum as provided under Section 17 of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act' for short).

(2.) THE brief facts which are relevant for the disposal of this appeal alone are noticed. In this regard, it is seen that the Appellants and the second Respondent -Cooperative Bank entered into certain loan transaction which ultimately resulted in the issue of notice dated 02.09.2004 under Section 13(2) of the Act. and possession notice dated 02.09.2004 to the Petitioners by the Respondent. The Petitioners responded to the same by their application dated 30.09.2004 by way of objection to the said notice. The Respondents by their communication dated 29.10.2004 however directed the Petitioners to approach the appropriate forum, if they are aggrieved and as such did not advert to the details of the objection raised. The Appellants accordingly assailed the notice dated 02.09.2004, possession notice dated 02.09.2004 and the communication dated 29.10.2004 which were impugned at Annexures -D, H and L to the writ petition. The Appellants also sought for issue of mandamus to the Respondents to consider their objections filed to the show cause notice. The learned Single Judge, on noticing the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Mardia Chemicals Ltd. Etc. Etc. Vs. Union of India (UOI) and Others Etc. Etc., AIR 2004 SC 2371 has relegated the Appellants to the alternative forum without deciding the correctness or otherwise of the action of the Respondents which has resulted in this appeal.

(3.) SINCE the learned Single Judge has merely relied on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court and relegated the Appellants to the alternate forum, the only question for consideration in this appeal is as to whether the course adopted by the learned single Judge is justified in the present facts, though there can be no quarrel with regard to the proposition of law laid down in the said decision and the binding nature of the same in a case where the facts are analogous. The very perusal of the portion of judgment in Mardia Chemicals extracted by the learned Single Judge would indicate that the objection filed to the notice issued under Section 13(2) of the Act should be considered by the secured creditor by application of mind and the result should be communicated, though for information without giving rise to any right to approach the Debt Recovery Tribunal since the subsequent procedure adopted alone would provide for appeal.