PUSHPABEN BABUBHAI GURJAR Vs. GANESHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS writ-petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is at the instance of the legal heirs of a debtor of respondent no.2 Bank, praying for the following reliefs :

(2.) THE record further reveals that in the past the petitioners being aggrieved against the action of the respondent Bank under Section 13(4) of the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Act, 2002 (for short, 'SARFAESI Act')had preferred a writ-petition being Special Civil Application No.2920 of 2011. The said writ-petition was disposed of by a Division Bench of this Court vide order dated 28 th March 2011. The order reads as under :

(3.) MR .K.I.Patel, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners vehemently submitted that the respondent Bank has acted in a very highhanded and arbitrary manner in proceeding against the late Shri Babubhai Gurjar, as a result of which, Shri Babubhai Gurjar passed away on account of severe stress and pressure exerted by the Bank. It has also been submitted by Mr.Patel that property worth crore of rupees was disposed of by the Bank for a sum of Rs.77,98,000=00 in favour of the respondent no.3. Mr.Patel further submitted that the proceedings undertaken by the Bank under the provisions of the SARFAESI Act were not in accordance with law and, therefore, the entire sale of the mortgaged property deserves to be set-aside. Mr.Patel submitted that after the demise of late Shri Babubhai Gurjar, the family members have landed up in great difficulty and it is beyond their means to prefer any appeal before the appellate tribunal as it is not possible for them to deposit 75% of the amount of debt due to the bank. In the circumstances, according to Mr.Patel, the petitioners are left with no other alternative but to challenge the constitutional validity of the various provisions of the SARFAESI Act as well as the RDDB Act.