(1.) The grievance of the petitioner is as to the order attaching the property in question. This Attachment Order has been made by the Regional Commissioner in exercise of power reading under Sec. 3 of the Karnataka Protection Of Interest Of Depositors In Financial Establishments Act, 2004. Learned counsel for the Petitioner argues that such an attachment order could not have been casually passed, right to property having been constitutionally guaranteed under Article 300-A. He urges other points also.
(2.) Learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for the respondents points out that an alternate & efficacious remedy is provided under Sec. 12(3) of 2004 Act and that can be availed even by one who is not a party to nomine party to the original proceedings. Such a view is already taken by this Court in a catena of decisions, as rightly submitted by the learned Additional Government Advocate.
(3.) In view of the above, the Writ Petition is disposed off permitting the Petitioner to file an application for raising the attachment, if grounds do exist therefor; if such an application is made, the learned Judge of the Special Court is requested to hear & dispose of the same within an outer limit of six weeks from the date a copy of this judgment is handed excluding the period of adjournment secured by the petitioner.