K SWARNALATHA Vs. KARNATAKA STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) WRIT petition by a person who had acted as, surety in respect of a loan borrowed by an industrial concern from the first respondent Karnataka State Industrial Investment and Development Corporation Ltd. The property bearing old No. 19, Old House List No. 15, new khata No. 57, New House List No. 19, situated at Raghuvanahalli, Uttarahalli Hobli, Bangalore south taluk, belonging to the petitioner, which according to the first respondent-corporation, was a collateral security for repayment of the loan borrowed by M/s. Techsmart Astenizer Pvt. Ltd. , had been proposed for sale by the Corporation in exercise of its power under Section 29 of the State Financial Corporations Act, 1961, (for short, the Act) by issuing a paper publication to this effect carried out in the Deccan Herald and the Economic Times, news dailies on 29-7-2004 (copy at Annexure-R-9 to the writ petition ).

(2.) IT is the version of the petitioner that the procedure followed by the first respondent corporation is without any conformity with the proper procedure contemplated for such purpose; that the petitioner had never been put on notice; that the petitioner has not received any notice either demanding the repayment of loan or for the proposal to bring her property for auction sale; that the entire proceedings are bad in law; that notwithstanding, the petitioner having filed the present writ petition on 6-12-2004 and the respondents have gone ahead even subsequent to the filing of the writ petition by executing the sale deed in favour of the bidders, who, in turn appear to have sold the same in favour of another person, who has been impleaded as fourth respondent to this writ petition during the pendency of this writ petition; that all such actions are bad in law.

(3.) THE respondents have been put on notice and they have entered appearance through counsel. The first respondent-corporation is represented by Sri D. C. Joshi, Sri V. T. Rayareddy is appearing for second respondent, third respondent is represented by Sri P. K. Ponnappa and the fourth respondent is represented by Sri Padmanabha Mahale, learned senior counsel for Sri H. H. Kaladagi.