Page 113 - GSTL_21st May 2020_Vol 36_Part 3

2020 ] STATE BANK OF INDIA v. UNION OF INDIA 359
Tiruchirapalli Camp, trial in their case may be ordered to be conducted in a
speedy manner.
25. Finding justification in the plea made by the Learned Government
Pleader and considering the fact that, several Non-Bailable Warrants have al-
ready been issued to the Petitioners and that, there is every possibility of the Peti-
tioners fleeing away from the clutches of Law, this Court while declining the relief
sought by the Petitioners, without prejudice to the rights of the parties in the pending
Habeas Corpus Petitions, directs the Learned Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate
(Economic Offences-I), Egmore, Chennai to take up the case in C.C. No. 1 of 2020, after
normalcy is restored post COVID-19 lockdown, and proceed with the same on a day-to-
day basis, without adjourning it beyond ten working days at any point of time.
26. Before parting with, I wish to emphasize that, there are advantages
in hearing cases through Whatsapp Video Call, and the fact remains that, it is less
time-consuming, and it will be helpful to analyze the exact scenario of each case,
so as to arrive at a definite conclusion, as was done in the case on hand. The sys-
tem of viewing disputed sites through “Whatsapp Video Call or any other Applica-
tion through Video mode” can be implemented in cases pertaining to encroachments
on roads, water bodies, poramboke lands, Tanks, illegal constructions, OSR, Parks, etc. to
ensure that, the Officials/Authorities discharge their work without any extraneous con-
sideration.
27. With the above direction and observations, Writ Petitions stand
dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petitions if any, are
closed.

_______

2020 (36) G.S.T.L. 359 (Telangana)

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT
HYDERABAD
M.S. Ramachandra Rao and T. Amarnath Goud, JJ.
STATE BANK OF INDIA

Versus
UNION OF INDIA
Writ Petition No. 20196 of 2019 and I.A. Nos. 1-3 of 2019, decided on 21-4-2020
Recovery of any amount due to Central Government - Income Tax re-
fund Order of 6th respondent-assessee for ` 35,75,95,400 received on 20-5-2019
credited into the TRA account of assessee in the petitioner-bank at its CCG
Branch, Hyderabad - Section 31B of Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and the
Financial Institutions Act, 1993 (later renamed as Recovery of Debts and Bank-
ruptcy Act, 1993) and Section 26E of Securitisation and Reconstruction of Fi-
nancial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (SARFAESI Act,
2002) as per Section 88 of Finance Act, 1994 give priority to claims of secured
creditors like the petitioner-bank over the dues of the State such as Service Tax
dues/Income Tax dues and the non obstante clause therein overrides the provi-
sions of Finance Act, 1994 like Section 87(b)(i) - Consequently, impugned no-

GST LAW TIMES  21st May 2020  113