Patna High Court
Raj Kumar Gupta vs The General Manager on 22 November, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.2904 of 2021
======================================================
1. Raj Kumar Gupta Son of Late Hira Lal Gupta
2. Smt. Sheela Devi wife of Raj Kumar Gupta
Both resident of Mohalla - Baburbanna, P.S. - Sohsarai, District- Nalanda.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The General Manager, Central bank of India, Chandramukhi, Nariman Point,
Mumbai, 400021.
2. The Regional Manager, Central Bank of India, Regional Office, Zonal
Office, Block - B 2nd Floor, Maurya Lok complex, Patna.
3. The Authorized Officer, Central bank of India, Recovery Department,
Regional Office White House Compound A.P. Colony, Gaya.
4. The Branch Manager, Central bank of India, Kisan College Branch,
Sohsarai, Nalanda.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Mukesh Kumar, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S. KUMAR
ORAL JUDGMENT
(Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE)
Date : 22-11-2021
Heard learned counsel for the parties.
Petitioner has prayed for the following relief(s).
"(i) For issuance of an appropriate writ/writs in the
nature of Mandamus' commanding and directing
the respondents to quash the possession Notice
dated 3-02-2020, issued by the Respondent Branch
Manager, Central Bank of India, Kisan College
Branch Sohsarai, Nalanda, whereby and where
under the respondents have taken possession of the
property of petitioners situated at Mauza
Baburbanna Thana - Rahui, Thana No. 141, Khata
No. 74, plot No. 408 Tauzi Bihar Sarkar Ward No.
30/2, H.N. 1107A.
Patna High Court CWJC No.2904 of 2021 dt.22-11-2021
(ii) For issuance of an appropriate direction to the
respondents to stay/not take any coercive step to
take possession of aforesaid land.
(iii) For any other reliefs to which the petitioner
may be found entitled to in the facts and
circumstances of the case.
The respondents have taken possession of
aforesaid land under section 13(4) of SARFAESI
Act without following norms and guidelines of
Rule 8 of the Security Interest (Enforcement)
Rules, 2002.
(iv) Further for a direction to the respondents to
not take any coercive steps against the order dated
3/2/2020 passed by them U/S. 13/4 of SARFAESI
Act.
After the matter was heard for some time, learned
counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner shall be content
if a direction is issued to the appropriate authority to consider
and decide the representation to be filed, within a period of three
months from the date of its presentation.
Without expressing any opinion on merits of the
claim, petition is disposed of with the liberty aforesaid. All
issues on facts and law are left open.
Needless to say that while considering such request,
principles of natural justice shall be followed and due
opportunity of hearing afforded to the parties.
If aggrieved by the said order, the petitioner shall
have liberty to approach this Court by way of separate
petition(s), if so required and desired.
Equally, liberty is reserved to the petitioner to take
Patna High Court CWJC No.2904 of 2021 dt.22-11-2021
recourse to such alternative remedies as are otherwise available
in accordance with law.
We are hopeful that as and when petitioner takes
recourse to such remedies, as are otherwise available in law,
before the appropriate forum, the same shall be dealt with, in
accordance with law and with reasonable dispatch.
The petition stands disposed of in the aforesaid terms.
Interlocutory application, if any, shall also stand
disposed of.
(Sanjay Karol, CJ)
( S. Kumar, J)
veena/rajiv-
AFR/NAFR NAFR
CAV DATE NA
Uploading Date
Transmission Date NA
