IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

DHARWAD BENCH

DATED THIS THE 15^TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2021

BEFORE

THE HON9BLE MR.JUSTICE N.S.SANJAY GOWDA

WRIT PETITION NO.20394/2007 (GM DRT)

BETWEEN:

ILC INDUSTRIES LIMITED.,

(FORMARLY INTEGRAL LOGISTICS CO.PVT. LTD.,)

A COMPANY REGISTERED UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT, 1956,

HAVING ITS OFFICE AT NO.D6/7,

NEAR INDUSTRIAL ESTATE, DAM ROAD,

HOSPET 583203,

REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR

SRI K. S. SOMASHEKAR.

...PETITIONER

(BY SRI VISHWANATH HEGDE, ADVOCATE)

AND :

1.

THE RECOVERY OFFICER-II,

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL,

KRISHI BHAVAN, HUDSON CIRCLE,

NRUPATHUNGA ROAD, BANGALORE -1.

2.

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL,

KRISHI BHAVAN, HUDSON CIRCLE,

NRUPATHUNGA ROAD, BANGALORE-1

REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR.

3.

STATE BANK OF HYDERABAD,

NO 15/42, NEHRU COOPERATIVE COLONY,

DAM ROAD, HOSPET 583203,

BELLARY DISTRICT,

REPRESENTED BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER.

: 2 :

4.

KRISHNA CEMENT AND STEELS PRIVATE,

LIMITED, PLOT NO 6,

ASSESSMENT NO.18004,

SURVEY NO 202/D/S, HOSPET CITY,

BELLARY.

&RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI K. NAGESHWARAPPA, ADV. FOR RESPONDENT NOS.1 & 2)

(BY SRI K.L.PATIL, AND V.S.BYATNAL, ADV. FOR RESPONDENT

NO.3)

(SERVICE OF NOTICE TO RESPONDENT NO.4-DISPSENSED WITH)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227

OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE WRIT OF

CERTIORARI SETTING ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED

13.11.2007 IN DCP.NO.3473 AND CONSEQUENTLY SET-ASIDE THE

ORDER DATED 13.9.2006 IN AOR:16/07 WHICH WAS TAKEN ON

APPEAL BEFORE THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL (ANNEXURE-Q

AND M) AND ISSUE WRIT OF MANDAMUS DIRECTING THE 1^ST

RESPONDENT TO ACCEPT THE BALANCE OF CONSIDERATION OF

RS.27,75,000/- WHICH THE PETITIONER IS READY AND WILLING

TO TENDER AND WHICH HE HAS ALREADY WILLING TO TENDER.

THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY,

THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

ORDER

The petitioner is the auction purchaser in an action

conducted by the Recovery Officer for recovery of an amount

found to be due to the Bank under the provisions of the

Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act. A required under the

auction notification the appellant paid a sum of Rs.9,25,000/-

being 25% of the sale consideration on the day of the auction

i.e., on 17.01.2006.

: 3 :

2.

It is the case of the petitioner that in respect of

the balance amount of 75%, he had given a cheque to the

Recovery Officer for a sum of Rs.27,38,000/-. According to

the petitioner, this cheque was deposited on 01.02.2006 i.e.,

within the period of 15 days from 17.01.2006 and thus, there

was compliance of the terms of the auction notification.

3.

However, the Recovery Officer by an order dated

13.09.2006 came to the conclusion that the petitioner had

failed to deposit of balance amount of 75% and therefore he

forfeited 25% already paid by the petitioner.

4.

Being aggrieved by the order of the Recovery

Officer, the petitioner preferred an appeal to the Debt

Recovery Tribunal. Before the tribunal, the bank submitted

that it had no objection if the appellant was permitted by the

trial Court to tender the balance money and for the sale to be

confirmed. However, the Tribunal has proceeded to dismiss

the appeal on the ground that the balance 75% of the auction

price was not deposited within 15 days and therefore, the

: 4 :

Recovery Officer had no other option but to forfeit 25%

deposited by the petitioner.

5.

It is to be stated here that neither the Recovery

Officer nor the Debt Recovery Tribunal has examined the

contention of the petitioner that he did make a deposit of

Rs.27,38,000/- by means of a cheque dated 01.02.2006, a

copy of which is produced as Annexure-E to this writ petition.

If, as a matter of fact, the petitioner has deposited a cheque

of Rs.27,38,000/- being the balance amount due and if the

petitioner

is

also

able

to

establish

that

a

sum

of

Rs.27,38,000/- was available in his Bank account as on

01.02.2006, the requirement of making the deposit