Deepak S/O Manohar Kakani And Others vs State Of Maharashtra, Thr. Secretary, ...
2024 Latest Caselaw 24766 Bom

Bombay High Court

Deepak S/O Manohar Kakani And Others vs State Of Maharashtra, Thr. Secretary, ... on 26 August, 2024

Author: Nitin W. Sambre

Bench: Nitin W. Sambre

2024:BHC-NAG:9526-DB
                 12-WP-4733-2024.odt                                           1


                                 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,
                                           NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR.

                                              WRIT PETITION NO. 4733 of 2024
                                        Mr. Deepak s/o Manohar Kakani and others
                                                                    vs.
                                              State of Maharashtra and another.
                 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 Office Notes, Office Memoranda of                                   Court's or Judge's Order
                 Coram, appearances, Court's Orders
                 or directions and Registrar's order
                 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                        Mr. S.S.Mohod, Advocate for petitioners.
                        Ms N. P. Mehta, Additional Government Pleader for respondent no.1

                        CORAM :- NITIN W. SAMBRE AND ABHAY J. MANTRI, JJ.

DATE :- 26th AUGUST, 2024.

Heard.

2. Drawing support from the judgment of the Apex Court in the

matter of PHR Invent Educational Society vs. UCO Bank and others

[(2024) 6 SCC 579], it is the contention of the learned counsel for the

petitioner that the property in question is located within the

jurisdiction of Civil Judge, Senior Division, Saoner and that being so,

the Court of Civil Judge, Senior Division, Nagpur has no territorial

jurisdiction to decide the issue. He would further claim that in the

aforesaid decision the Apex Court in categorical terms provides remedy

under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution when the powers are

exercised without jurisdiction and in violation of the principles of

natural justice.

3. As against above, Ms Mehta, learned Additional Government

Pleader would oppose the prayer. According to her, not only the

notices were issued to the petitioners but also published in the

newspapers.

4. We have appreciated the submissions.

5. In our view, the petitioners have an alternate remedy under the

provisions of Section 17 of the Securitization and Reconstruction of

Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002.

Merely because the Civil Court at Nagpur has passed the impugned

order that by itself cannot be said to be without jurisdiction

particularly when the property is situated within the principal Civil

Court of original jurisdiction. Even otherwise, the petitioners have

failed to demonstrate any prejudice as regards passing of the

impugned order by the Civil Judge, Senior Division, Nagpur.

6. That being so, we deem it appropriate to dispose of the writ

petition with liberty to the petitioners to take recourse to the alternate

remedy. No costs.

7. Needless to clarify that this Court has not gone into the merits

of the matter.

(ABHAY J. MANTRI, J.) (NITIN W. SAMBRE, J.)

Andurkar.

Signed by: Jayant S. Andurkar Designation: PA To Honourable Judge Date: 27/08/2024 15:40:37