Case BriefsHigh Courts

Himachal Pradesh High Court: The Bench of Surya Kant, C.J. and Sandeep Sharma, J. disposed of a petition with a direction to Debts Recovery Tribunal (DRT-I) to supply a copy of the order so as to enable the petitioner to file an appeal before Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal (DRAT).

In the present case the grievance of the petitioner was that the copy of the order dated 20-04-2019 by the Debts Recovery Tribunal-I, Chandigarh was not supplied to the petitioner where the same was appealable. But since the copy was not provided, therefore no appeal could be filed unless a copy of the order is supplied.

The Court considering the situation of the petitioner sympathetically allowed the petitioner to move an application before DRT-I within a day or a two with a prayer to order status quo ante for a period of ten days so as to enable him to file an appeal before DRAT meanwhile.[Shivalik Fibres (P) Ltd. v. Punjab National Bank, 2019 SCC OnLine HP 543, decided on 24-04-2019]

Case BriefsHigh Courts

Madhya Pradesh High Court: This petition was filed before a 2-Judge Bench comprising of S.C. Sharma and Virender Singh, JJ., against a judgment passed in appeal by the Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal, Allahabad.

Facts of the case were that petitioner took a loan and after non-payment of interest, the account was declared to be a non-performing asset. The details referred established that there was an outstanding balance continuously in excess of the sanctioned limit or drawing limit from the month of December, 2008 to February, 2009. Thus, petitioner’s property was kept in possession of Bank symbolically under Section 13(4) of the SARFAESI Act, 2002. Court was of the opinion that the account of the petitioner was rightly declared as NPA. While going through the process of auction, Court found no illegality on part of the Bank while recovering the dues from the mortgaged property.

High Court referred the case of Central Bank of India v. C.L. Vimla, 2016(1) MPLJ 101 and in light of the same, found no reason to interfere with the auction process conducted by the Bank, therefore, this writ petition was dismissed. [Mayunk Industries v. Union Bank of India, 2019 SCC OnLine MP 9, dated 03-01-2019]