Issue notice to opposite party nos. 1,2 and 7, dasti as well, returnable at an early date.
Notice on behalf of opposite party nos. 3 to 6 has been accepted by Sri D.K. Pathak, learned counsel appearing for Bank of India.
List after service report.
By means of the present petition, the petitioner is challenging the judgment and order dated 18.11.2013 passed in appeal No. R-188 of 2013 filed by opposite party no.7, whereby the appeal was allowed and the judgment and order dated 20.08.2013 passed by Debts Recovery Tribunal, by which the application under Section 17 of Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002, was dismissed.
Submissions of learned counsel for petitioner is that the impugned judgment and order dated 18.11.2013 is being challenged inter-alia on the ground that in fact it is admitted that the issue raised by the appellant/opposite party no.7 with regard to compliance of rule 9(4) of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest, Rules, 2002, has been raised, only first time, at the appellate stage. The issue is admittedly a question of fact and the same has never been raised by the private party/ opposite party no.7 in application under Section 17 for redemption, preferred before the Debts Recovery Tribunal, therefore, entertaining a new plea at the appellate stage by the Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal is not permissible under law and the same is also without jurisdiction.
The issue requires consideration.
In view of the above, the operation and implementation of the impugned judgment and order dated 18.11.2013, passed by Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal contained as Annexure No.1, to the writ petition, shall remain stayed till the next date of listing.
Order Date :- 11.3.2014 Vijay