SCA/7869/2008 1/4 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 7869 of 2008 For Approval and Signature: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE JAYANT PATEL ========================================================= 1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? 2 To be referred to the Reporter or not ? 3 Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgment ? 4 Whether this case involves a substantial question of law as to the interpretation of the constitution of India, 1950 or any order made thereunder ? 5 Whether it is to be circulated to the civil judge ? ========================================================= KISHANCHAND TRIKAMDAS VALECHA - Petitioner(s) Versus DENA BANK - Respondent(s) ========================================================= Appearance : MR RC JANI for Petitioner(s) : 1, RULE SERVED for Respondent(s) : 1, MR.D K.PUJ for Respondent(s) : 1, ========================================================= CORAM : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE JAYANT PATEL Date : 04/09/2008 ORAL JUDGMENT 1. The petitioner by this petition, has challenged the order passed by the learned Metropolitan SCA/7869/2008 2/4 JUDGMENT Magistrate for assisting the Bank to take over the possession of the property under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act,2002 (hereinafter referred to as the "Act"). 2. It appears that initially this Court had issued notice and thereafter, various orders were passed directing the petitioner to deposit the amount with the respondent Bank. Today, when the matter is taken up for hearing, Mr. Puj, the learned counsel for the respondent Bank confirms the position that all arrears of the installments are duly paid by the petitioner and now the petitioner will be required to pay regular installments as and when it becomes due. 3. Mr. Jani, learned advocate for the petitioner states that henceforth regular installment shall be paid as and when it becomes due. 4. In view of the above, as the account is regularized and the petitioner has also shown willingness to pay regular installment as and when it becomes due, the action under the Act, would not SCA/7869/2008 3/4 JUDGMENT survive since there would not be outstanding due. So far as future liabilities are concerned, the parties may abide by agreement of loan transactions. 5. As the respondent Bank invoked power under the Act and had approached before the learned Metropolitan Magistrate and based on the same, the learned Metropolitan Magistrate had passed order for providing assistance of the police for taking over the possession, such impugned order under Section 14 of the Act would also not survive, in view of subsequent developments referred to hereinabove. 6. Hence, present petition is disposed of with the observation that the action of the bank in view of the aforesaid fact as well as the order passed by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, both under the Act, which are impugned in the present petition would not survive. It is also clarified that for the future recovery of the loan, the parties may abide by the terms and conditions of the agreement. In the event, there is any failure on the part of the petitioner to pay the amount, the bank shall be at liberty to resort to an appropriate proceedings under the Act in SCA/7869/2008 4/4 JUDGMENT accordance with law and at that stage, right and contentions of both the sides under the Act shall remain open. Disposed of. Rule is made absolute accordingly. No order as to cost. (JAYANT PATEL, J.) ynvyas