Research › Search › Judgment

Gujarat High Court · body

2006 DIGILAW 753 (GUJ)

Ramanbhai Kashibhai Patel v. Bank of Baroda De. Reg. Manager(BR)

2006-11-22

D.A.MEHTA

body2006
JUDGMENT : D.A. Mehta, J. Rule The learned advocate for the respondent is directed to waive service and the petition is taken up for final hearing and disposal today. 2. This one page petition has been filed by the guarantor of the loan availed of by Kapilesh Spun Pipes Works, petitioner of Special Civil Application No.21183 of 2006. The case of the present petitioner is that the facts are identical to those stated in Special Civil Application No.21183 of 2006, which is preferred by the principal borrower. 3. However, the learned advocate for the respondent-Bank disputes this proposition. According to the learned advocate, the guarantor has not availed of the opportunity to make a representation or raise objection to the notice issued under Section 13(2) of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (the Securitisation Act) and hence, there is no question of the respondent-Bank being required to deal with the said objections within the statutory period of 07 (seven) days. 4. The stand of the respondent-Bank, if read only in context of the provisions of the Securitisation Act, may be correct. However, one cannot ignore the fact that both the principal borrower and the guarantor are served with the notice under Section 13(2) of the Securitisation Act qua the same financial transaction and qua the same property, namely, the property relatable to the loan transaction. In the circumstances, even if there is non-compliance on the part of the petitioner-guarantor, the petitioner-guarantor cannot be proceeded against, in the facts of the present case, independent of the action against the principal borrower, in whose case, by an order of even date made in cognate petition being Special Civil Application No.21183 of 2006, the impugned notice has been quashed and set aside. 5. The impugned notice is therefore quashed and set aside. In the circumstances, without expressing any opinion on merits of the controversy between the parties, the petition is allowed in the aforesaid terms. There shall be no order as to costs. Petition allowed.