K.LOKANATH NAIDU Vs. CANARA BANK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The parties to the lis are common and the issue is also same in both these petitions. Therefore, these petitions are taken up together and considered by this common order by noticing the pleadings in Writ Petition No.6180 of 2023.

(2.) Brief facts that are germane to be considered in the lis are as follows:-

(3.) On 7/4/2021 began the proceedings against the petitioner under the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 and the Rules framed thereunder (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act' and 'the Rules' for short). The Bank issues a notice to the petitioner on 7/4/2021 directing him to clear entire liability. The petitioner did not comply with the notice by making any payment. Another notice comes to be issued on 22/4/2021 again directing the petitioner to pay the entire dues. This time also when the petitioner did not comply with the orders, the Bank issues possession notices against the petitioner initially on 17/7/2021. A final possession notice was issued on 26/10/2021 under Sec. 13(4) of the Act and a symbolic possession of the property was taken. The petitioner approaches the Debt Recovery Tribunal-II, Karnataka at Bengaluru ('the Tribunal' for short) in S.A.No.191 of 2022 challenging the orders passed by the learned Magistrate under Sec. 14 of the Act. The petitioner, during the pendency of proceedings, seeks two weeks time from the Tribunal to propose an One Time Settlement offer and seeks a direction not to take any coercive action by the Bank. After about 2 months of filing of the said application, on 23- 08-2022, the Tribunal dismisses S.A.No.191 of 2022 affirming the measures taken by the secured creditor. On 6/10/2022, pursuant to dismissal of securitization application, the Bank takes physical possession of the commercial property that was subject matter of mortgage with the Bank.