(Per : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V. M. SAHAI)
1. Heard learned counsel Mr.Saurabh M.Patel for the petitioner and learned counsel Mr.Chetan Pandya for the respondent No.1.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner has urged that the appeal filed by respondent No.1 under Section 17 of the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002, was not maintainable as it was beyond 45 days. He has urged that, Section 5 of the Limitation Act does not apply to the proceedings under Section 17 of the aforesaid Act, as the proceedings are in the nature of the suit.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance on the decision of the Division Bench of Calcutta High Court in the case of Akshat Commercial Private Limited and Another Vs. Kalpana Chakraborty and others reported in AIR 2010 Calcutta 138. Prima facie, we find force in the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner and, therefore, the petitioner is entitled for interim relief.
4. Rule returnable on 03rd May, 2012. Learned counsel Mr.Chetan Pandya waives service of notice of rule on behalf of respondent No.1. He may file affidavit-in-reply within three weeks and two weeks thereafter to file rejoinder.
Until further orders, the effect and operation of order dated 18.3.2011 passed by the Debts Recovery Tribunal, Ahmedabad in M.A. (Delay) No.12 of 2011 shall remain stayed. Direct service is permitted.
(V.M.
SAHAI, J.) (A.J.DESAI, J.) syed/ Top