IRELE B£N.V c^ ^^^_ IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BILASPUR WRIT PETITION fCl N0.2o^.5~ OF 2007 PETITIONERS ^ T^.-; ,ft'.i '^•' ^/ ./•'^' .•- .(r~-? —^- ^y- ^ •^- •-4. 1. Smt. Sushila Devi Chimnani, aged about 54 years, wife of Shri Trilokchand Chimnahi. 2. Anil Kumar Chimnani, aged about 36 years, son of Shri Trilokchand Chimnani. Both residents of Idgahbhata, Lakhenagar, Raipur (C.G.) Vs RESPONDENTS f 1. Bank of Baroda, a banking p^:]> company duly incorporated under the relevant provisions of the Banking Companies (Acquisition & Transfer of Undertakings) Act, inter- alia amongst other branches a branch office at Mahaveer Goushala Premises, Moudhapara, Raipur, through the Chief Manager, Bank of Baroda, Mahaveer Goushala Premises, Moudhapara, Raipur. ^ 2. M/s Medico Surgical Enterprises, through Shri Prakash Vatyani, son of Late Chandrapal Wadhwa (J"'*^"'» (Vatyani), B-9, Suman Complex, Near Madhuvan Hotel, Sadar Bazar, Raipur. J&^ 3. Smt. Kanta Devi, aged about 54 years, widow of Late Chandrapal Wadhwa. /4. Prakash Wadhwa, aged about 41 years, son of Late Chandarpal Wadhwa. IJ^/5. Mahesh Wadhwa, aged about 39 years, son of Late Chandrapal Wadhwa. Respondent Nos. 3 to 5 are residents of Ravigram, Telebandha Raipur. WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH : BILASPUR WRIT PETITIO (C) N0.2045 OF 2007 PETITIONERS RESPONDENTS Smt. Sushila Devi Chimnani & Another Versus Bank of Baroda & Others (Writ Petition underArticle 226 & 227 ofthe Constitution of India) Single Bench : Hon'ble Shri Satish K. Agnihotri, J. Present:- Shri B.P. Sharma, Advocate for the petitioners. Shri Amiya Kant Tiwari, Advocate for the respondent No. 1 . QRDER (Delivered on this ^dayofAugust,2010) Challenge in this petition is to the possession notices dated 20/02/2007 (Annexure P/4) and dated Nil (Annexure P/5) issued by the respondent Bank to the petitioners under the provisions of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (for short "the Act, 2002"). The property in dispute was mortgaged by Prabhudas Wadhwa leaving behind the legal heir Chandrapal Wadhwa, who allegedly sold the said property thereafter by agreement dated 18-2-1987 (Annexure - P/1) to the petitioners. The loan was obtained on creating secured interest on the said property. Thus, the notices 20-2-2007 (Annexure - P/4) and dated Nil (Annexure - P/5) were issued to secure the possession of the said secured asset, as the borrower failed to respond to the earlier notice issued under Section 13 (2) oftheAct, 2002. €d v <&. Gowri This Court considered and decided the identical issue in Smt. Kavita Sharma v. State Bank of India & Others1 and other conneeted matters, reserving liberty to the petitioners therein to approachthe appellate forum under the provisions of the Act, 2002, if so advised. In Smt. Kavita Sharma (supra), this Court observed as under: "26. Thus, the apprehension of the petitioners that the petitioners may not get full opportunity to put forward their cases before the DRT is unfounded. 27. xxx xxx xxx XXX XXX XXX XXX XXX XXX 28. On the question of delay in filing the instant petitions, it isnot necessary to examine and reeord a finding, as the petitions are not being entertained on the ground of availability of alternative statutory appellate forum under the provisions of the Act, 2002. 29. Without going into the meritsof the case, as this may prejudice the rights of the parties, no such reasons have been noticed in this case to ignore the provisions of statutory appeal under the provisions ofthe Act, 2002." In view of foregoing, this petition is disposed of in terms of the order passed by this Court in Smt. Kavita Sharma (supra). No order asto costs. — Sd/- Judge W.P. (C) No.3466 of 2007 (decided on 5/8/2010)