ARUN KUMAR SARSWAT Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE writ petitioner questions the propriety of the respondent bank in having caused the petitioner to be dispossessed from a property without following due process pf law.

(2.) THE petitioner claims to have entered into an agreement with Super tech Limited for being inducted as a monthly tenant at an apartment measuring about 365. 72 sq. ft. on the sixth floor of premises No. 18a, Park Street. The agreement, a copy whereof is annexure P 2 to the petition, is dated December 4, 2002. The document, on a stamp paper of Rs. 10/-, records that a security deposit of Rs. 1 lakh had been paid by the petitioner which was refundable without interest at the time of the petitioner vacating the premises. The tenancy was to be for a period of 15 years and the petitioner was to use the flat either for residential or business purpose.

(3.) AT the fifth paragraph of the petition it is averred that on November 16, 2005 some persons "claiming themselves to be officers of Allahabad Bank" called at the petitioner's office at the said premises and represented that since the "petitioner's landlord" had failed to repay a loan of Rs. 1,80,57,350/-, an officer of the bank authorised under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (the said Act)was empowered to take possession of the premises which had been mortgaged to the bank. It is stated in the petition that the authorised officer of the bank took symbolic possession of the premises since the petitioner was in possession thereof. It is evident from paragraph 5 of the petition that the bank attempted to serve a notice on the petitioner but the "petitioner refused to accept the notice. "