1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE WRIT PETITION NO.4631 OF 2010 Prasad Prabhakar Ghatwai & Anr. : Petitioners V/s. Asset Reconstruction Company (India) Limited & Ors. : Respondents .... Mr.Mayur Khandeparkar with Ms Sapna Ruchare i/.b. T.N.Tripathi & Co., for the petitioners. Mr.S.S.Ghosh for respondent no.3. .... CORAM : D.D. SINHA AND MRS.MRIDULA BHATKAR,JJ. DATE : JUNE 17, 2010. P.C.: Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the respondent no.3. 2. This Writ Petition is directed against the order passed by the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate dated 3.4.2010 on the application filed by the petitioners under section 14(1) of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (hereinafter referred to as the “Securitisation Act”). The learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the respondent-Bank did not take 2 symbolic possession of the property in question under section 13(4) of the Act and straightaway invoked the provisions of section 14(1) of the Securitisation Act. The action of the respondent-Bank takes away the right of the petitioners to file an appeal under section 17 of the Securitisation Act, since the Bank has not taken symbolic possession of the property under section 13(4) of the Securitisation Act. 3. Counsel for the petitioners states that the petitioners are ready and willing to to give symbolic possession of the property to the respondent-Bank on 18.6.2010 at 12.00 noon. It is prayed that the respondent-Bank may be directed to withdraw the proceedings initiated by the Bank under section 14(1) of the Securitisation Act at this stage. Counsel for the Bank states that if the petitioners are ready and willing to give symbolic possession on 18.6.2010 at 12.00 noon in respect of the property in question, the said possession would be taken under section 13(4) of the Act. The respondent-Bank, in the circumstances, will withdraw the proceedings initiated under section 14(1) of the Securitisation Act at this stage. Counsel for the Bank further submitted that in case the petitioners fail to hand over symbolic possession and/or at a later point of time create obstruction in this regard, liberty may be given to the respondent-Bank to invoke the provisions of section 14(1) of the Securitisation Act at that stage. 3 4. Considered the contentions canvassed by the respective counsel. On the back-drop of the above referred facts, it is apparent that for want of taking symbolic possession under section 13(4) of the Securitisation Act by the Bank, the petitioners will lose the right to file an appeal under section 17 of the Securitisation Act. Since the petitioners have agreed to hand over symbolic possession of the property in question and the Bank has also agreed to take the same, we permit the respondent-Bank to withdraw the proceedings initiated under section 14(1) of the Securitisation Act at this stage with liberty to invoke the same at an appropriate stage. 5. In the circumstances, the Writ Petition is disposed of accordingly. (D.D. SINHA, J.) (MRS.MRIDULA BHATKAR,J.)