MANOJ D KAPASI Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. Subramaniam for petitioners, mr. Bhatija for Union of India, Mr. Shah for respondent No. 2, Mr. Madan for respondent No. 4. Respondent No. 3 is served. Respondents have argued the matter without insisting on filing any reply. By consent matter is heard finally at the admission stage.

(2.) Second petitioner is Ruby Coach Building Company and petitioner No. 1 is its director. An amount of Rs. 3,64,78,000/- was due from the petitioners to the respondent No. 2 bank as on 26th October, 2004. All avenues to recover the amount having failed, respondent No. 2 first called upon petitioners on 3rd august, 2002 to clear the outstanding amount under section 13 (2) of the securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of security Interest Act, 2002 (for short Securitisation Act) and following non-compliance proceeded to take possession of the secured assets under section 13 (4) thereof on 6th December, 2002. The property consisted of certain parcels of land situated at Marol, Mumbai as also the plant and machinery situated thereon.

(3.) Thereafter the respondent issued public auction notice on 19th June, 2004 to hold the auction on 30th July, 2004. Petitioners filed appeal under section 17 of the Securitisation Act to challenge the notice dated 3rd August, 2002 and applied for interim stay, but that was rejected by the Debt Recovery tribunal (DRT) on 22nd July, 2004. The petitioners filed W. P. Lod. No. 2124 of 2004 to challenge the notice dated 3rd August, 2002 and 19th June, 2004. Therein an order was passed in terms of the minutes by Division Bench on 30th july, 2004.