SPN KRISHNAMURTHY Vs. IDBI BANK LIMITED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner, who is the alleged lessee in respect of the property which was mortgaged by the respondents 2 to 5 with the 1st respondent Bank, has filed the above Writ Petition to issue a Writ of Certiorarified mandamus to call for the records of the 6th respondent in respect of the impugned possession order dated 14.03.2018 in Crl.M.P.No.507 of 2018 and to quash the same and consequently direct the respondents 1 & 6 not to dispossess the petitioner from the property (i.e.) I, II & III Floors of the building bearing Old No.156, New Door No.29, Plot No.2, T.S.No.8345 situated at Chinmaya Street, T.Nagar, Chennai - 17 except under due process of law.

(2.) It is the case of the petitioner that he became a tenant in respect of the said property and entered into a Lease Agreement dated 18.02017 for a period of 11 months commencing from 01.03.2017 to 31.01.2018 and the lease was extended for another period of 11 months from 01.02018 to 31.12018 and separate Lease Agreements were entered into with the 2nd respondent on 18.02017 and 01.02018.

(3.) It is also the case of the petitioner that the respondents 2 to 4 borrowed money from the 1st respondent-Bank by executing a Mortgage Deed in favour of the 1st respondent-Bank. Since the respondents 2 to 4 defaulted in re-paying the loan amount, the 1st respondent initiated proceedings under the SARFAESI Act. Subsequently, the 1st respondent also filed a petition under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act before the 6th respondent for taking physical possession of the property. The 6th respondent, by order dated 14.02018, allowed the petition in Crl.M.P.No.507 of 2018 and appointed an Advocate Commissioner for the purpose of taking possession of the property and hand over the same to the 1st respondent-Bank. As against this order, the alleged lessee has filed the above Writ Petition.