AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Sushrut Arvind Dharmadhikari, J
This petition has been filed seeking direction to the respondents No.1 and 2 to open the lock of the premises in question.
The petitioner had taken loan from respondent No.3 and since, the same could not be returned on time, the respondent No.3 has proceeded and initiated proceedings against the petitioner, against which the petitioner has already approached the Debt Recovery Tribunal, Jabalpur in S.A. No.12/2023, which is an application under Section 17 of the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (SARFAESI Act). The learned Tribunal vide order dated 06.02.2023 has entertained the second appeal and has also passed the interim order to the effect that the auction proceedings shall not be concluded by the respondents, which is scheduled on 15.02.2023 till further orders.
The grievance of the petitioner is that the petitioner had already moved an application for restoration of physical possession of the property in question, but the learned Tribunal observed in the order that the said application shall be heard at the time of final hearing only.
On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondents/State has opposed the prayer and submitted that this writ petition is not maintainable against the Private Housing Finance Company directly since, in the present writ petition, no order of the D.R.T. or any Tribunal, etc. has been challenged. Moreover, such directions cannot be issued to the Collector, particularly when the proceedings are already pending before the D.R.T. and interim relief in favour of the petitioner is passed.
This Court finds force in the submission of learned counsel for the respondents/State. Accordingly, this petition is bereft of merits and substance at the admission stage itself. The same is hereby dismissed.