AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
The respondent no.2 filed S.A. bearing No. 97/2026 titled as M/s Betterchoice Realtors Private Limited v. Edelweiss Asset Reconstruction Company Limited which is stated to be pending before the DRT-II, Chandigarh.
The SA applicant filed an interim application bearing I.A. No. 967/2026 which was decided vide order dated 17.07.2026. Sh. Vinayak Uniyal, Counsel appearing for the appellant stated that in the order dated 17.07.2026 his attendance was wrongly marked as Counsel for the auction purchaser in place of applicant who filed an application (I.A. No. 996/2026) for seeking intervention as a necessary and proper party in S.A. bearing No. 97/2026.
Sh. Vinayak Uniyal, Counsel argued that in the order dated 17.07.2026 the DRT-II, Chandigarh has not referred the application preferred by the appellant and that application is still pending before DRT-II, Chandigarh for adjudication. It is further argued that the DRT-II, Chandigarh has not passed appropriate order in favour of appellant who is stated to be the allottee of the subject property.
Sh. Rajeeve Mehra, Senior Counsel along with Sh. Kashish Narang and Ms. Deobshree Saha, Counsels who put up appearance on behalf of respondent no.1/Financial Institution stated that the appropriate remedy which is available to the appellant is to file separate securitization application and in the present S.A. bearing No. 97/2026 he cannot be allowed as intervener. If he is having any independent right on the subject property the appropriate remedy would be to file separate Securitization Application before the DRT. It is argued that the present appeal is liable to be dismissed.
It is not in dispute that the attendance of Sh. Vinayak Uniyal was wrongly mentioned as Counsel for the auction purchaser which is liable to be corrected. It is also reflecting from the order dated 17.07.2026 that DRT-II, Chandigarh has not referred or disposed of the application filed by the applicant for seeking intervention as necessary and appropriate party in S.A. bearing No. 97/2026.
Accordingly, in view of the above circumstances, the DRT-II, Chandigarh is directed to make necessary correction in the order dated 17.07.2026 regarding appearance of Sh. Vinayak Uniyal, Counsel and also to decide and dispose of the application filed by the appellant for seeking intervention as necessary and proper party in S.A. bearing No. 97/2026 along with other reliefs, if any, as prayed for in accordance with law.
The appellant is directed to appear before the DRT-II, Chandigarh on 27.07.2026 at 10:30 a.m. on priority basis. It is also made clear that all the pleas and contentions of the contesting parties are left open and to be considered and decided by the DRT-II, Chandigarh.
The copy of this order be sent to DRT-II, Chandigarh for information and compliance.