AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Dr. S.K. Panigrahi, J
This matter is taken up through hybrid arrangement.
In filing this Writ Petition, the Petitioner being a loanee, has sought for a direction from this Court to the Opposite Party Nos.1 to 3/ the Bank authorities for preventing the Opposite Party No.6/the auction purchaser from undertaking the further construction within the premises of the disputed property in question till conclusion of the proceeding vide Appeal pending before the learned Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal, Kolkata.
Bereft of unnecessary details, at the outset, learned counsel for the Petitioners submits that during pendency of the appeal vide Dy.No.313 of 2024 at the instance of the Opposite Parties/Bank before the learned DRAT, Kolkata challenging the judgment and order dated 11.03.2024 passed by the learned DRT, Cuttack in S.A. No.69 of 2022, the Opposite Party No.6/the auction purchaser is attempting to make construction within the premises of the disputed property in question.
He further submits that by the order dated 10th April, 2024 the learned DRAT, Kolkata while staying the operation of the judgment and order dated 11.03.2024 passed by the learned DRT, Cuttack in S.A. No.69 of 2022, has also directed for posting the matter vide Dy.No.313 of 2024 on 18th June, 2024 for hearing.
In his opposition, Mr. Rath, learned Senior Advocate appearing on behalf of the auction purchaser/Opposite Party No.6 submits that in the meantime the auction purchaser has already paid the entire amount. He further submits that upon payment of the said amount the sale deed has already been executed and the R.O.R. has already been published in favour of the Opposite Party No.6.
At this juncture, learned counsel for the Petitioners submits that despite staying of the operation of the order of the learned DRT, Cuttack by the learned DRAT, Kolkata, the Opposite Party No.6 is attempting to change the nature and character of the disputed property in question. Hence, this Writ Petition.
Mr. Rath, learned Senior Advocate appearing on behalf of the auction purchaser/Opposite Party No.6 disputes the above submission of learned counsel for the Petitioners.
Be that as it may, this Court is of the view that since the matter is pending before the learned DRAT, Kolkata, it is improper on the part of this Court to interfere in this matter.
In such view of the matter, this Court requests the learned DRAT, Kolkata to take up the matter at the earliest possible, so that none of the parties shall be prejudiced.
It is further directed that if there is any urgency in the matter, the Petitioners may approach the learned DRAT, Kolkata for listing of the matter before the scheduled date.
This Writ Petition is, accordingly, disposed of.
......…………………………..