bsb IN IN IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL CIVIL CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT WRIT WRIT PETITION NO. 7004 OF 2005 PETITION NO. 7004 OF 2005 PETITION NO. 7004 OF 2005 Hari Krishna Sagarmal Shah ... Petitioner v/s N.J. Bavadia, Special Recovery Officer of Greater Bombay Co-op. Bank Ltd. & ors. ... Respondents Mr.Jayendra S. Shah for the petitioner. Mr.V.R.Walawalkar i/by Mr.S.R.Bhalekar for Resp.No.3. CORAM: CORAM: CORAM: SMT.NISHITA MHATRE, J. SMT.NISHITA MHATRE, J. SMT.NISHITA MHATRE, J. DATED: DATED: DATED: 17TH NOVEMBER, 2008 17TH NOVEMBER, 2008 17TH NOVEMBER, 2008 P.C. P.C. P.C.: 1. The petitioner is aggrieved by the fact that a show cause notice has been issued to him for attachment of his flat being Flat No.74, Building No.B/2, Technocrat Co-operative Housing Society Ltd., Veer Savarkar Marg, Prabhadevi, Mumbai-400 025. 2. The petitioner contends that he has nothing to do with the borrowers i.e. respondent Nos.4 and 5 herein and, therefore, his flat should not be attached. He has also contended in the petition that the attachment order has been sought to be passed after 12 years and, therefore, it is barred by limitation. 2 3. It appears that the petitioner had made an application through his advocates on 5.8.2002 to the Recovery Officer raising the aforesaid contentions. However, this application has not been decided and the petitioner contends that instead the recovery officer sought to take possession of the flat with the help of the police. 4. The petitioner can raise all such contentions before the recovery officer. The recovery officer shall decide the application filed by the petitioner through his advocate on 5.8.2002. The issue regarding limitation also can be decided by the recovery officer. This is a view taken by a learned Single Judge of this Court in Writ Petition No.3053 of 2007 with other connected matters in which the borrowers i.e. respondent Nos.4 and 5 had challenged all the notices issued by the recovery officer. This Court has directed in para 5 of the order dated 13.7.2007 that all the contentions could be raised before the recovery officer including the question of limitation. 5. The petition is therefore rejected leaving the petitioner to raise all contentions raised in the petition, before the Special Recovery Officer by filing an additional application, if necessary. Till then the 3 Special Recovery Officer will not take possession of the aforesaid flat. 6. In case the petitioner wishes to file an additional application before the Special Recovery Officer, he may do so within four weeks from today.