AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
S.J. Vazifdar, Acting CJ. - The petitioner has challenged notices under Sections 13(2) and 13(4) issued by the respondent-bank under the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (in short SARFAESI Act) as well as an order dated 21.04.2014 passed by the Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal and an order dated 29.02.2016 passed by the Debts Recovery Tribunal.
The petitioner had filed an appeal under Section 17 of the SARFAESI Act challenging the notices under Sections 13(2) and 13(4) which the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner states was decided in his favour. He further states that the Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal allowed the 2nd respondent''s appeal and remanded the matter to the Debts Recovery Tribunal. He further states that the Debts Recovery Tribunal upon remand by the impugned order held the notices to be valid.
In that event, normally, the petitioner ought to have availed the alternate remedy of filing an appeal against the order of the Debts Recovery Tribunal which was passed on remand. There is no warrant for invoking the writ jurisdiction of this Court at this stage.
However, we intend granting the petitioner some indulgence in view of the statements and offers made before us. The petitioner agrees and undertakes to deposit an amount of Rs. 6 lacs with the Debts Recovery Tribunal by 30.03.2016 by cheque. The petitioner has made a statement that the cheque upon presentation will be honoured.
In view of the statement and only in the event of the petitioner depositing a further sum of Rs. 2 lacs with the Debts Recovery Tribunal by 12.04.2016, physical possession of the petitioner''s property shall not be taken upto and including 30.04.2016. The respondents shall, however, be entitled to take formal possession, but shall not dispossess the petitioner and all the parties shall maintain status quo in respect of the property in question in all respects.
This limited protection has been granted only to enable the petitioner to avail the alternate remedy of filing an appeal against the order of the Debts Recovery Tribunal impugned before us.
The petition is accordingly disposed of.
It is clarified that if the cheque is not deposited or if deposited is not honoured and the further amount of Rs. 2 lacs is not deposited, as stated above, the protection granted by this order shall stand vacated forthwith.
A copy of this order be furnished to learned counsel for the petitioner under signatures of the Bench Secretary.