CourtKutchehry.com
High CourtsSingle Bench(2022) 02 UK CK 0140

M/s S.K. Tempo Corporation & Others vs Union Bank Of India

Uttarakhand High Court · Decided on 25 February 2022

HON’BLE JUDGES
Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J
RESULT
Disposed Of
CASE NUMBER
Writ Petition (M/S) No. 169 Of 2022

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

9 paragraphs · 306 words

Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J

1.

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2.

Petitioners are borrowers, who are facing recovery proceedings under Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002. In this writ petition, petitioners have challenged an e-auction notice in respect of the secured asset, which was to be held on 22.10.2021.

3.

Learned counsels for the petitioners submit that petitioners have already approached Debts Recovery Tribunal, Dehradun, by filing Securitization Application No. 134 of 2021, but, on account of vacancy on the post of Presiding Officer, no order could be passed on their application.

4.

Learned counsel for the respondent-bank was asked to get instructions in the matter.

Today, on instructions, he submits that commercial property, which was mortgaged by petitioners with the bank, has been sold in e-auction, held on 22.10.2021. He, however, submits that since no bids were received in respect of the residential property, mortgaged by petitioners with the respondent-bank, therefore, residential property is yet to be sold.

5.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that since petitioners’ Securitization Application is pending before Debts Recovery Tribunal and Debts Recovery Tribunal is lying vacant since long, therefore, petitioners are entitled for a limited protection, till appointment of Presiding Officer.

6.

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, the writ petition is disposed of by providing that for a period of six weeks or till appointment of Presiding Officer in Debts Recovery Tribunal, Dehradun, whichever is earlier, sale of residential property of the petitioner, mortgaged with the bank, if any, shall not be confirmed and status quo, qua possession thereof, shall be maintained for the aforesaid period.

7.

It is made clear that Debts Recovery Tribunal will take a decision on Securitization Application of the petitioners on merits, untrammelled by any observation made in this order.