AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Respondents filed S.A. bearing no.47/2017 titled As Girivar Hotels and Resorts Private Limited V India SME Asset Reconstruction Company Limited which was ordered to be dismissed vide order dated 12.03.2019 by observing that the S.A. applicant is not interested and is not duly represented. Thereafter, the S.A. applicants filed an application bearing M.A. No.177/2019 for restoration of the S.A. where a payer was made to recall the order dated 12.03.2019 and restore the S.A. bearing No.47/2017. M.A. 177/2019 is still pending for adjudication before the DRT.
The DRT vide order dated 09.01.2026 has passed the following order:-
In this matter, the settlement cannot took place as the applicant is offering Rs.3.60 Cr. Against the one property and were ready and willing to deposit Rs.50.00 Lac yesterday, they have come with a Demand Draft of Rs.50.00Lac and submitted that they are ready to transfer Rs.50.00 Lac more. It is an admitted fact by bank that they were having a buyer of Rs.3.25 Cr. Even after the property is sold under the Securitization Act, it cannot be said that payment will come within 15 days, the purchaser may seek extension up to 90 days for depositing the balance amount, therefore, this argument of the respondent is not acceptable that they are seeking two monthtime to make the payment. Yesterday also there was another property where 11 plots are there and that also the applicant was ready and willing to re3deem before March for Rs.3.90Cr. and the same is not acceptable to the bank. Re-notify the matter on 07.02.2026 for final arguments, till then Status Quo shall be maintained. It is made clear that no further adjournment shall be given.
Sh. Kaushik Mishra, Advocate for the appellant stated that after the dismissal of the S.A. bearing No.47/2017 vide order dated 12.03.2019 it has not been restored so far and restoration application bearing M.A. No.177/2017 is pending. The S.A. baring No.47/2017 is not in existence and despite that DRT has passed the status quo order in a hurried manner which the DRT should not have done without going into the merit.
It is argued by the counsel for the respondents that due to the pendency of the M.A. No.177/2019, the DRT, Jaipur has rightly passed the status quo.
It is reflected from the record that the S.A. bearing No.47/2017 was dismissed vide order dated 12.0.2019. An application bearing M.A. No.177/2019 for restoration of the S.A. is pending. It appears that the DRT vide order dated 09.01.2026 without considering the merits of the case has passed status quo order which should not have been passed. It is also appearing that the appellant was not also given due opportunity to represent before the passing of the status quo order. The impugned order dated 09.01.2026 cannot be sustained under law and is accordingly set aside. However, in the interest of justice, respondents are given opportunity to file appropriate application for status quo order within two weeks from today. The DRT thereafter shall dispose of the said application within two weeks on merit after hearing the counsel for the parties.
In the interest of justice, the impugned status quo order shall continue till the next date of hearing which is stated to be 04.06.2026.