Ganesh Woollen Mills vs Punjab National Bank

S.N.H. Zaidi, J

Since Mr. Pallav Saxena has appeared for the respondent, the caveat is discharged.

Heard parties' Counsel on application (I.A. 246/2012) filed by the appellant for exemption from depositing the amount under Section 18 of the SARFAESI Act for the entertainment of the appeal.

Mr. Suri points out that by the impugned order, which has been assailed in the appeal, the learned Tribunal below has rejected the request of the appellant for disposal of the pending interim applications (I.As.) before proceeding to finally hear the arguments on the S.A., with the observation that the pending I.As. would be disposed of along with the main S.A. Considering the nature of the impugned order. I am in agreement with Mr. Suri that since the order or the prayer of the appeal does not have the effect of staying any of the measures of the bank taken under Section 13(4) of the said Act for the recovery of the public money, therefore, the appellant is not required to make any pre-deposit as required under the second proviso to Section 18(1) of the SARFAESI Act. The application is disposed of accordingly. The appeal is entertained. Let it be registered.

Also heard the parties counsels on admission. This appeal has been directed against the order dated 10.2.2012 passed by the learned Presiding Officer of the DRT-II, Chandigarh, whereby the pending I.As. have been directed to be disposed of along with the main S.A. and the matter has been posted for final arguments in the S.A.

Mr. Suri points out that certain applications filed by the appellant and others in the S.A. were pending disposal and when it was pointed out by him that those interim applications be disposed of prior to the hearing on the S.A., the learned Tribunal passed the impugned order saying that the I.As. would be disposed of with the main S.A.

Mr. Suri has pointed out to one of such I.As. which was filed by the appellant for placing on record the tender of the highest bidder in respect of the property bearing Kothi No. 153-D, Ranjit Avenue, Amritsar. The contention of Mr. Suri in this regard is that since the authorized officer of the bank did not comply with the requirement of the rules while conducting the auction sale, therefore, the said application was moved. Admittedly, the appellant has challenged the actions of the bank taken under Section 13(4) of the SARFAESI Act in its S.A. Sale of the secured asset is also one of the actions contemplated under the said sub-section of Section 13. I do not see any good reason as to why that application should have been considered and disposed of prior to the hearing of the S.A. In my opinion that application can very well be disposed of along with the S.A.

Mr. Suri further points out to another application filed by the appellant for directing the Authorized Officer of the bank for registration of the FIR in respect of the theft committed in the property in question after its possession was taken by the bank and for restoration of its possession to the applicant/appellant. Though Mr. Saxena disputes the commission of theft, in the manner as alleged in that application, yet in my opinion, necessary direction for lodging the report, if needed, can be given on hearing and disposing of the application along with the S.A and again there appears to be no good ground for considering that application before the hearing of arguments in the main S.A. The prayer regarding restoration of possession can also be considered and necessary orders in respect thereof may be passed while disposing of the S.A.

Another application (I.A. No. 397/2010) pointed out by Mr. Suri was filed by the appellant for forfeiture of the amount deposited by the auction purchaser towards the earnest money. It appears that during the proceedings of sale of the secured asset through auction the highest bidder had deposited certain amount with the authorized officer of the bank in accordance with the terms of the sale notice. It also appears that subsequent thereto some person had approached the Tribunal through an application with a higher offer and the Tribunal below had directed for the inter se bidding between the applicant and the highest bidder. However, it also transpires that on the date fixed for inter se bidding neither the applicant, who had offered a higher amount nor the highest bidder turned up and the inter se bidding could not take place. Mr. Suri submits that since after depositing the earnest money the balance amount was not deposited by the highest bidder within the stipulated period of 15 days, therefore, the application was moved for the forfeiture of the earnest money. In my opinion, that application can also be considered and disposed of along with the main S.A. and there was no need for its prior disposal to the hearing of the S.A.

Though Mr. Suri is also referring to the applications filed by the respondent bank and the highest bidder, but since the applicants of those applications are not aggrieved with the impugned order, therefore, the appellant cannot be said to be aggrieved from the order of disposal of those applications along with S.A.

Mr. Suri also points out that the Local Commissioner appointed by the Tribunal, has filed the report and the appellant has filed reply in respect thereof but that report was also not disposed of by the Tribunal below. No disposal of the report of the Local Commissioner, being and officer of the Court, is required even if any objection/reply is filed qua that report.

Mr. Saxena has also pointed out that this Tribunal had directed the Tribunal below for disposal of the S.A. within the given timeframe and while making the impugned order the Tribunal has also taken into consideration the said direction.

In view of the foregoing discussion, I do not find any substance or merit in the appeal, which cannot be admitted. The appeal is accordingly dismissed in limine.

The learned Presiding Officer is expected to dispose of the S.A in accordance with law expeditiously, if possible, within two months from today. Copy of this order be furnished to the parties as per law and a copy be sent to the DRT concerned.