- (1.) HEARD Mr. Mardikar, learned Counsel for the petitioner, mr. Thakkar, learned Counsel for respondent No. 1 and Mr. Kaptan, learned counsel for respondent No. 2. Rule made returnable forthwith by consent of the parties.
(2.) THE short question, which falls for our consideration in the present case, is whether the action taken under sub-section (3) of section 13 of the securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002, by respondent No. 1 is valid in view of the law laid down by the Apex Court in (Mardia Chemicals Limited and others v. Union of india and others), 2004 (4) Bom. C. R. (S. C.)530 : 2004 (2) Mh. L. J. 1090. Mr. Mardikar, learned Counsel for petitioner, states that in the instant case notice under sub-section (2) of section 13 of the said Act is issued to the petitioner on 9th September, 2003. The petitioner filed objection to the said notice on 7th November, 2003. However, the said objection has neither been considered by respondent No. 1, nor there is any reasoned order passed by respondent No. 1 for rejecting the objection, nor the petitioner was communicated the decision of respondent No. 1 on the objection. It is contended that in absence thereof, the action taken by respondent No. 1 under sub-section (4) of section 13 of the said Act is not sustainable in view of the afore mentioned judgment of the Apex Court and, therefore, the said action should be quashed and set aside.
(3.) MR. Thakkar, learned Counsel for respondent No. 1, on the other hand, does not dispute the fact that there is no reasoned order passed by respondent No. 1 rejecting the objection, dated 7th November, 2003, of the petitioner. It is contended that though action under sub-section (4) of section 13 was proposed to be taken by respondent No. 1, however, since the petitioner approached this Court, and this Court vide order, dated 21st November, 2003, prevented the respondent No. 1 from taking actual possession of the property pursuant to the notice, dated 9th September, 2003, no action could be taken against the petitioner under sub-section (4) of section 13 of the Act. Mr. Thakkar, learned Counsel for respondent No. 1, states that the respondent no. 1 now shall follow the procedure laid down by the Apex Court in the above referred judgment namely the respondent No. 1 shall reconsider the objection, dated 7th November, 2003, submitted by petitioner to the show cause notice, dated 9th September, 2003, and if respondent No. 1, for reasons, reject the same, that will be done by passing a speaking order and the same would also be communicated to the petitioner, who will be entitled to take appropriate steps thereafter, according to law.;