AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
The petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 30.08.2017, passed by the learned DRAT in Misc. Appeal No. 365/2017 filed by the respondent/Bank
against the order dated 23.08.2017, passed by the DRT-II, Delhi whereunder her application for seeking release of the vehicle on superdari was
allowed on a conditional basis.
We have enquired from learned counsel for the parties to inform us about the status of the impleadment application filed by the petitioner before the
DRT-II. They state that the said application is still pending and is listed on 09.10.2017, for appropriate orders. In view of the pendency of the said
application, we decline to entertain the present petition till appropriate orders are passed by the DRT-II. In view of the above, the impugned order
dated 30.08.2017, passed by learned DRAT does not deserve interference, till the pending impleadment application is disposed of by the DRT.
It is clarified that if the impleadment application filed by the petitioner is allowed, then she shall be entitled to file a fresh application before the
DRT-II for release of the vehicle, which shall then be decided on merits, uninfluenced by the earlier orders passed by the DRT-II and the impugned
order passed by the DRAT.
In view of the above, the present petition along with the pending applications stand disposed of.