AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Ashok Menon, Chairperson
The Appellant in this Misc. Appeal No. 12/2023 has approached this Tribunal aggrieved by the fact that the Debts Recovery Tribunal-I, Mumbai has not passed any orders on I.A. No. 10/2023 seeking permission to take over possession of the secured assets with police assistance. It is submitted that I.A. has neither been dismissed nor allowed and that no specific date also has been assigned for the hearing on I.A. No. 10/2023 in S.A. No. 48/2020.
The Respondent has filed a reply. The Ld. Counsel appearing for the Respondent submits that I.A. No. 10/2023 was posted for hearing on 20.01.2023 and that there was no representation on behalf of the Appellant on that day. And again, it was posted for hearing on 25. 01.2023 with the same result that there was no representation for the Appellant herein and the I.A. now stands posted on 10.02.2023 for hearing.
After having heard the Ld. Counsel appearing for both sides for some time, I find that there are no specific orders made under Sec. 17 of the Securitisation & Reconstruction of Financial Assets & Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002(‘SARFAESI Act’, for short) which requires interference by this Tribunal. However, this application can be taken as an application filed under Sec. 17-A of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993(RDB Act) since the Appellant is anxious that some orders be passed on I.A. No. 10/2023.
Under the circumstances, D.R.T.-I, Mumbai is directed to take up the I.A. No. 10/2023 for hearing expeditiously and pass orders on that I.A. as expeditiously as possible at any rate within a period of one week from the receipt of the order of this Tribunal.
The Misc. Appeal is disposed of accordingly.