Tribunals and CommissionsSingle Bench(2026) 02 DRAT CK 3361

M/s. Hurley Builders & Developers Private Limited vs Punjab National Bank & Ors.

Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal, Chennai · Decided on 24 February 2026

HON’BLE JUDGES
G. Chandrasekharan, Chairperson
RESULT
Disposed of
CASE NUMBER
AIR 501/2026 (MA.NDN.No.11/2026 in Dairy No.67/2024 on the file of DRT-I, Chennai), AIR 502/2026 (MA.NDN.No.9/2026 in Dairy No.67/2024 on the file of DRT-I, Chennai), AIR 503/2026 (MA.NDN.No.7/2026 in Dairy No.67/2024 on the file of DRT-I, Chennai) & AIR 504/2026 (MA.NDN.No.13/2026 in Dairy No.67/2024 on the file of DRT-I, Chennai)

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

7 paragraphs · 400 words

COMMON ORDER

These appeals are filed against the proceedings of the learned Presiding Officer, DRT-I, Chennai in MA (NDN) 7/2026, 9/2026, 11/2026 AND 13/2026. By the said proceedings, learned Presiding Officer, DRT-I, Chennai, directed that these MAs to be registered and ordered copies to be served on the first respondent and notices to other respondents were dispensed. There was also a direction to the Registry to inspect the disposed file and submit a report as regards any interim order of attachment, if found in the file concerning the properties mentioned in the letter of Sub Registrar, Sunguvarchatram.

2.

This direction was necessitated on receiving the letter from the Sub Registrar dated 03.09.2025 seeking certain clarifications with regard to attachment orders, if any, concerning the properties mentioned in the letter apart from the fact that the afore said applications were filed to raise the order of attachment passed in OA 146/2023.

3.

Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that these matters are not heard by the learned Presiding Officer, DRT-II, Chennai, who is in-charge of DRT-I, Chennai. In view of the urgency involved, these matters are to be heard immediately, else, appellant would be put to prejudice and loss.

4.

Learned counsel for the appellant made specific complaint against the Registry of DRT-I, Chennai that the Registry deliberately delaying the submissions of the report called for.

5.

It is seen that the MA (NDN) 7/2026, 9/2026, 11/2026 AND 13/2026 are still pending and no interim or final orders have been passed, but, only a direction was issued as afore mentioned. Therefore, this Tribunal is of the view that it is not an appealable order entitling the right of appeal. However, this Tribunal, in view of the submissions made by the learned counsel for the appellant that in the absence of the learned Presiding Officer, DRT-I, due to illness, these matters, which are to be heard expeditiously, is of the view that a direction may be given to the learned Presiding Officer, DRT-II, who is in-charge of DRT-I in the absence of the learned Presiding officer, DRT-I, to take up these matters immediately by expediting the process of getting a report from the Registry with regard to attachment mentioned above and dispose the aforesaid MAs as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a fixed time. Accordingly, these appeals are disposed. Parties shall bear their own costs.

Pending IAs, if any shall stand closed.