1 WP 8985/2010 abs FARAD CONTINUATION IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 8985 OF 2010 Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Court's or Judge's Orders Coram, appearances, Court's Orders or directions and Registrar's Orders Mr. Satish Borulkar i/b Mr.Sachin Patil for the petitioner. Mr. Bhushan A. Walimbe for respondent no.2. CORAM : D.G. KARNIK, J DATE : 3RD AUGUST 2011 P.C. : 1. By an application dated 13th April 2010, the petitioner, who is a decree holder, prayed for removal of the notice affixed to the movable machinery of the judgment debtor to the effect that the movable property was subject to a charge of Maharashtra State 2 WP 8985/2010 Cooperative Bank Ltd. (respondent no.2 herein) and that the same had been repossessed by it under the provisions of Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002. The petitioner further prayed that the movable property be auctioned by removal of the said notice, that is to say without notice to the auction purchaser that the respondent no.2 bank is in possession of the machinery and held a charge on it. 2. The fact that the property was charged to the respondent no.2 bank was upheld by the trial Court in its previous order dated 23rd January 2009 passed below Misc. Civil Application No. 30 of 2008 filed by the respondent no.2 bank. The petitioner was respondent no.1 in the said misc. application. That order was not challenged by either of 3 WP 8985/2010 the parties and therefore the finding that the said machinery was charged to the respondent no.2 bank has become final. Consequently, the trial Court committed no error in rejecting the application of the petitioner for removal of the notice of charge and effecting the auction/sale of the movable property without disclosure of the charge. There is no merit in the writ petition which is hereby rejected. (D.G. KARNIK, J.)