SUSHIL KUMAR Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Recall application, being MCC no. 860 of 2015, was dismissed for non -prosecution by this Court vide order dated 23.12.2015. It is the submission of learned counsel for the applicants / petitioners that when the case was called out, he was on his legs in another court. Being satisfied with the sufficiency of reasons thus furnished, restoration application MCC no. 12 of 2016 is allowed. As a consequence thereof, present writ petition alongwith recall application MCC no. 860 of 2015 is restored to its original number.

(2.) Recall application, being MCC no. 860 of 2015, was moved by the applicants / petitioners on 21.12.2015 for recalling the order dated 17.12.2015, passed by this Court. It is prayed that the applicants / petitioners be granted some suitable time for the purpose of settling the bank dues by selling out the mortgaged property. The order dated 17.12.2015, passed by this Court runs as follows:

(3.) While seeking recall of order dated 17.12.2015, it is the submission of learned counsel for the recall applicants that the respondent bank has not complied with the provisions of Section 13(3A) of Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002. The applicants / petitioners have the intention to pay back the outstanding loan amount to the bank. Applicants / petitioners want some time so that they could find a solution and arrange for the fund, as they are not in a capacity to repay the same at the moment. The respondent bank has already taken the actual physical possession and has dispossessed the applicants / petitioners. It is the submission of learned counsel for the recall applicants that the respondent bank is trying to sell out the property on cheaper rates and, therefore, order dated 17.12.2015, be recalled.