Icici Bank Ltd, Regd. Office v. M/S.Tulip Data Centre Pvt Ltd,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

Dated : 21/7/2016 C O R A M The Honourable Mr.Justice HULUVADI G.RAMESH and The Honourable Mr.Justice M.V.MURALIDARAN Writ Petition No.18413 of 2016 ICICI Bank Ltd rep. By its Secretary Registered Office at Landmark Race Course Circle Vadodara 390 007.

Also at NBCC Place Pragati Vihar Bhishma Pitamah Marg New Delhi 110 003.

..Petitioner Vs.

1. M/s.Tulip Data Centre Private Limited (through its Authorized Representative Lt.Col.H.S.Bedi) Having its Registered Office at No.162 (P) 163, 164 (P), 165 (P) EDIP Area, Phase II Whitefield, Bangalore 560 066.

2. M/s.SADA IT Park Private Limited (through its Authorized Representative Lt.Col.H.S.Bedi) Having its Registered Office at No.162 (P) 163, 164 (P), 165 (P) EDIP Area, Phase II Whitefield, Bangalore 560 066.

3. IDFC Bank Limited 2nd Floor, Capital Courts OLOP, Palme Marg Mudirka, New Delhi 110 067.

4. The Registrar Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal Chennai 600 008.

..Respondents Prayer:

Petition filed Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a writ of certiorarified mandamus to call for the records of the Hon'ble DRAT, Chennai in M.A.(SA) No.53 of 2015 and quash the impugned order dated 30/3/2016 and further grant an interim protective order restraining the third respondent from taking any further action against the property at Plot No.162 (P), 163, 164 (P) and 165 (P) of EPIP Industrial Area, situated in Survey No.7 part & 8 part of Kundalhalli Village, K.R.Pura Hobli and Banglore East Taluka, under SARFAESI Act.

For Appellant : Mr.V.T.Gopalan Senior Counsel for Mr.OM Prakash for M/s.Ramalingam Associates For Respondents : Mr.R.Mohan for Mr.Kushal Gupta for R.1 Dr.P.Vasudevan for Mr.Kushal Gupta for R.2.

Mr.T.K.Bhaskar for R.3.

Tribunal - R.4.

- - - - - -

O R D E R

(Order of the Court was made by HULUVADI G.RAMESH,J) Heard Mr.V.T.Gopalan, learned Senior Counsel, assisted by Mr.Om Prakash for M/s.Ramalingam Associates for the petitioner, Mr.R.Mohan for Mr.Kushal Gupta for the first respondent, Dr.P.Vasudevan for Mr.Kushal Gupta for the second respondent and Mr.P.S.Raman, learned Senior Counsel for Mr.T.K.Bhaskar for the third respondent.

2. The writ petition has been filed seeking for the issuance of a writ of certiorarified mandamus calling for the records relating to the impugned order dated 30/3/2016, issued by the fourth respondent and grant an interim protective order restraining the third respondent from taking any further action against the property at Plot No.162 (P), 163, 164 (P) and 165 (P) of EPIP Industrial Area, situated in Survey No.7 part & 8 part of Kundalhalli Village, K.R.Pura Hobli and Banglore East Taluka, under SARFAESI Act.

3. The petitioner is a Banking Company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956. The first respondent herein had availed the credit facilities from the petitioner at their New Delhi branch. It appears that such credit facilities were extended without any collateral security.

4. On a careful perusal of the records, it could be seen that vide order, dated 2nd June 2016, this Court has directed the parties to maintain status-quo.

5. The authorised representative of the borrowers, viz., 1 and 2 is present before this Court, today.

6.

Mr.V.T.Gopalan, assisted by Mr.Om Prakash for M/s.Ramalingam Associates, learned counsel appearing for ICICI Bank Ltd., would submit that ICICI Bank Ltd., has moved a case to DRET, Delhi in O.A.No.235 of 2015.

7. In view of the above submission made by the learned counsel, this Court is of the considered opinion that the petitioner can very well urge the matter before the Appellate Tribunal, with regard to the disposal of some of the properties, with the third respondent and now, the petitioner, having obtained an order of status-quo for some reasonable time, could not make any arrangements and hence the interim order cannot be continued.

8. The writ petition is disposed of. However, it is open to the petitioner to approach the Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal, Allahabad, for any further orders, within a period of two weeks, from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. On such approach, the Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal, shall consider all the aspects and so far as the secured and unsecured creditors are concerned, it shall be decided by the Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal, subject to the nature of the guarantee extended by the borrower. However, Mr.R.Mohan for Mr.Kushal Gupta, learned counsel who appeared for Mr.

Bedi, who borrowed the amount from the third respondent as well as from the petitioner Bank, submitted that he would work out the same for one time settlement and further submitted that one of the properties had been sold by the petitioner for 22 crores which was worth more than Rs.50 crores. This could be taken note of at the time of disposal of the appeal by the Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal. All the contentions are left open to be urged by the authorities before the Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal. No costs.

Petition No.16114 of 2016 is closed.

mvs Sd/- Asst.Registrar /true copy/ Sub Asst. Registrar To

1. The Registrar Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal Chennai 600 008.

+ 1 cc to Mr.T.K.Bhaskar, Advocate Sr 41748 + 2 ccs to M/s.Ramalingam & Associates, Advocate Sr 41382 + 1 cc to Mr.R.Mohan, Advocate Sr 41377 KR/8/8/16 Writ Petition No.18413 of 2016