AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
ORDER
Ld. Counsel for the appellants is present.
Despite service of notice, there is no representation for the respondents.
Therefore, this Tribunal proceeds to dispose this appeal.
This appeal is filed against the order dated 15.09.2023 passed by the Learned Presiding Officer, DRT-I, Karnataka at Bengaluru in IA No. 3766/2019 in unregistered Securitization Application IR No. 4549/2019(Dy.No.2750/2019). The said IA was filed for condoning the delay of 39 days in filing the SA. Securitization application was filed challenging the order passed under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act by the learned X Addl. Chef Judicial Magistrate, Bengaluru in Crl.M.P.No.50263/2013 on 17.08.2019. Appellants are not aware of this order. They knew about the said order only the Advocate Commissioner visited the property on 27.09.2019. Thereafter, appellants filed four writ petitions in W.P.Nos. 48880/2019 to 48884/2019 against the order passed under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act. These writ petitions were disposed by a common order dated 04.11.2019 giving liberty to the petitioners to approach the appropriate forum within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the order. The said order copy was made ready on 26.11.2019 and delivered on 28.11.2019. Securitization application was filed on 20.12.2019 within four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the order in the writ petitions. Therefore, securitization application is not barred by limitation.
As already stated, this appeal is filed against the order passed IA No.3766/2019 filed to condone the delay of 39 days in filing the SARFAESI application i.e., IR 4549/2019, which was filed to challenge the order passed under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act.
Ld. Counsel for the appellants submitted that there is no delay in filing the appeal for the reason that appellants were not aware of the order passed by the Ld. CMM dated 17.8.2019 until advocate commissioner came for taking possession on 27.9.2019. Immediately, thereafter Writ Petition has been filed and the Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka directed the appellants to approach the DRT within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the order. Accordingly, SARFAESI application was filed within four weeks from the date of copy of the order, thus, there is no delay.
However, this Tribunal, on going through the order of the Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka in the said Writ Petition found that though Hon’ble High Court directed the appellants to approach appropriate Authority under the provisions of the SARFAESI Act within four weeks from the date of receipt of copy of the order, there is no indication for condonation of delay in approaching DRT. Final observation was that “if such an appeal is filed, DRT shall decide the same in accordance with law”.
Appellants had not made out a case for approaching the Hon’ble High Court of Karantaka when there is remedy available before DRT. Delay from the date of passing of the order under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act, especially, from the date of knowledge is not properly explained.
Recently, Hon’ble Supreme Court of India, in its order dated 7.1.2026 passed in Civil Appeal No.92/2026 (arising out of SLP(C) N.3906/2017) in re, The property Company (P) Ltd. Vs. Rohinten Daddy Mazda held that Tribunals are not Courts and they are not empowered to condone the delay in filing application under Section 17(1) of SARFAESI Act unless there is specific provision for condonation of delay. There is no specific provision in the SARFAESI Act, for condonation of delay in filing application under Section 17(1) of SARFAESI Act.
Therefore, this Tribunal is of the view that dismissal of IA No.3766/2019 in SA IR No.4549/2019 (Dy.No.2750/2019) by the Learned Presiding Officer, DRT-I, Bangalore vide his dated 15.9.2023 is correct and it does not call for any interference.
In this view of the matter, this Appeal MA (SA) 36/2023 is dismissed. However, no order as to costs.
Pending IAs, if any, stand closed.