AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Ashok Menon, Chairperson
The Appellant in the Appeal impugns the order of the D.R.T.-II, Mumbai in I.A. No. 2288/2022 in S.A. 302/2022 dated 10.10.2022 which grants an ad-interim relief in favour of the Respondent herein. The Appellant is aggrieved with prayers 39 (a) and 39 (b) of the I.A. No. 2288/2022 being allowed. Sarfaesi measures have been challenged on various grounds and Ld. Presiding Officer on prima facie findings found favour with the averments made by the applicant.
I am told that the pleadings in the S.A. are almost complete, and if it is not, they shall be completed expeditiously. The findings are only for the purpose of arriving at an ad-interim order. The relief is not likely to influence the final findings of the Ld. Presiding Officer in the S.A. Since there are more materials forthcoming, the contentions are kept open to be decided on the merits in the S.A. which shall take up as expeditiously as possible and disposed of preferably within a period of two months from the date of receipt of this order.
I make it clear that I am not entering into any finding on the merits of this case. The finding in the impugned order shall also not influence the final order to be passed in the S.A. The contentions are left open to be decided in the S.A.
The Ld. Counsel for the Appellant has also raised the contention that by the time this interlocutory order was passed. , the notification regarding the jurisdiction of the Tribunal had also come in place, and D.R.T.-II, Mumbai had actually lost jurisdiction to decide the matter since, all the matter over and above Rs.100 Crores were to be transferred to D.R.T.-I, Mumbai. The Ld. Counsel for the Respondent however controverts this.
Without any findings on the jurisdictional aspect, I am of the opinion that the D.R.T.-I, Mumbai shall dispose of the S.A. as expeditiously as possible as stated above. The appeal is disposed of as above.