(1) WP No. 6156/2006 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO.6156 OF 2006 AND WRIT PETITION NO.3728 OF 2008 ----- WRIT PETITION NO.6156 OF 2006 Industrial Development Bank] of India Ltd., Branch at ] PETITIONERS. Aurangpura, Aurangabad. ] VERSUS City & Industrial Develop- ] -ment Corpn. of Maharashtra] RESPONDENTS. Ltd. Aurangabad & others ] ----- Mr.S.V.Adwant,Advocate for the petitioner. Mr.A.S.Bajaj, Advocate, for respondent No.1. Mr.S.V.Gangapurwala, Advocate, for respondent No.2. Mr.M.K.Goyanka, Advocate, for respondent No.2. Mr.A.M.Karad,Advocate, for respondent Nos.3 and 4. ----- AND WRIT PETITION NO.3728 OF 2008 Sharad s/o Musaddilal Gupta] R/o Jethmalnagar, Jalna ] PETITIONER Dist. Jalna. ] VERSUS The City and Industrial ] Development Corporation of ] RESPONDENTS. Maharashtra Ltd., ] Aurangabad & another. ] (2) WP No. 6156/2006 ----- Mr.M.K.Goyanka,Advocate for the petitioner. Mr.A.S.Bajaj,Advocate, for respondent No.1. Mr.S.V.Adwant,Advocate, for respondent No.2. ----- CORAM : Naresh H. Patil and N.D.Deshpande, JJ. DATE : 3rd July, 2009. ORAL ORDER [ PER – NARESH H. PATIL, J.] 1] Heard the submissions advanced by learned counsel appearing for respective parties in both the petitions and perused the orders passed by this Court in both the petitions. 2] Shri.S.V.Adwant, learned counsel for petitioner in Writ Petition NO.6156 of 2006, on instructions, seeks withdrawal of petition. Leave to withdraw the said petition is granted and the said petition stands rejected as withdrawn. 3] As regards Writ Petition No.3728 of 2008, we find that certain issues related to disputed questions of fact with regard to determination of lease are raised in the petition, which could be resorted to in an appropriate Civil Court. 4] The learned counsel Shri.A.S.Bajaj, for (3) WP No. 6156/2006 respondent CIDCO, submits that the subject-plot is in possession of CIDCO. 5] The learned counsel Shri.A.M.Karad, appearing for respondents No.3 and 4 in Writ Petition No.6156 of 2006, submits that the physical possession is with allottee company viz. Vaishali Aromatics (India) Pvt. Ltd. 6] The learned counsel Shri.Adwant submits that the Bank had settled the accounts with the original borrowers and, therefore, he has no grievance now to set aside the auction sale and hand over possession of subject-plot to original borrower. 7] The learned counsel Shri.Goyanka submits that as an auction purchaser the sale was confirmed. He deposited 25 percent of the amount in the proceedings pending in Debts Recovery Tribunal, but due to correspondence made by Bank the remaining amount could not be deposited though auction purchaser was ready to deposit the entire amount. 8] After considering the submissions advanced, we find that all these issues relating to disputed questions of fact raised could be gone into by resorting to an appropriate remedy in the Civil Court. We are, therefore, of the opinion that the (4) WP No. 6156/2006 parties are entitled to approach the Civil Court or any other forum for redressal of their grievances. 9] The learned counsel Shri.Goyanka appearing for petitioner/auction purchaser submits that the petitioner is willing to approach the Civil Court and would take appropriate steps within twelve weeks. Under the orders of this Court, United Western Bank as then it was (now Industrial Development Bank of India Ltd.) had deposited the amount of interest to the tune of Rs. Four Lakhs Seventy Thousand One Hundred Forty Six Only with the Registry of this Court. 10] In case the amount is lying with the Registry, the Bank is entitled to withdraw the said amount from the Registry. 11] We observe that have not expressed any opinion on the merits of the matter and all issues are kept open. 12] With these observations both the petitions are disposed of. 13] We direct the contesting parties that for a period of twelve weeks status quo in respect of subject-plot shall be maintained and no third party interests shall be created as regards the plot which (5) WP No. 6156/2006 was subjected to auction. The subject-plot shall not be released by the Bank in favour of borrower. This order would operate for a period of twelve weeks. [ N.D.Deshpande,J.] [ Naresh H. Patil,J.] pcr/o/wp6156.06