AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Vipin Sanghi, CJ
1) The petitioner has preferred the present writ petition to assail the order dated 29.05.2023, passed by the P.O., DRT, Dehradun, in S.A. No. 128 of 2023, preferred by the petitioner under Section 17 of the SARFAESI Act.
2) By the impugned order, the DRT required the petitioner / borrower to deposit rupees ten lacs in the Tribunal, so as to consider the prayer of the petitioner which was to challenge the auction sale of the petitioner’s property - the secured asset, conducted by the respondent bank under the SARFAESI Act.
3) The petitioner also assails the order dated 27.06.2023, whereby the said application was dismissed in default. Pertinently, in relation to the second order, the petitioner has already preferred restoration application, which is pending consideration.
4) The submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner’s application under Section 17 would not be considered, unless the petitioner makes a deposit of rupees ten lacs, as directed vide order dated 29.05.2023. The petitioner assails the imposition of the said condition by the DRT.
5) Learned counsel submits that, since the petitioner has very good case on merits, he could not have been required to make the said deposit by the DRT. We do not find any merit in this submission. Admittedly, the petitioner is a defaulter, and the petitioner’s account was declared NPA by the respondent bank.
6) In these circumstances, in our view, the DRT was justified in imposing the said condition on the petitioner. In any event, the petitioner has statutory right of appeal before the DRAT and, that is another reason, why we are not inclined to entertain the present petition.
7) The writ petition is, accordingly, dismissed.
8) Interim Relief Application (IA No. 01 of 2023) also stands disposed of.