Delhi High Court - Orders
Sunil Jain vs Diwan Housing Finance Corporation Ltd on 14 February, 2022
Author: Prateek Jalan
Bench: Prateek Jalan
$~15 (2022 Cause List)
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ CM(M) 1139/2021
SUNIL JAIN ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr. Vishan Kumar Mishra,
Attorney [Mob. 9717612377]
versus
DIWAN HOUSING
FINANCE CORPORATION LTD ..... Respondent
Through: None.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRATEEK JALAN
ORDER
% 14.02.2022 The proceedings in the matter have been conducted through video conferencing.
CM APPL. 8015/2022 (extension of time to clear amount of ₹4,66,944)
1. The petitioner has filed this application for further extension of time to deposit the balance out of the amount of ₹5,66,944/-, as directed by the order of this Court dated 10.12.2021, and extended by the order dated 07.01.2022.
2. The petition under Article 227 of the Constitution [CM(M) 1139/2021] was directed against an order dated 20.09.2021 passed by the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate (North East District), Karkardooma Courts, Delhi, on an application by the respondent under Section 14 of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:SHITU NAGPAL Signing Date:15.02.2022 19:04:24 CM(M) 1139/2021 Page 1 of 4 Enforcement of Securities Interest Act, 2002.
3. In view of the fact that the Debts Recovery Tribunal ["DRT"] was not functioning, the petition was entertained by this Court, and disposed of with the following order dated 10.12.2021:
"10. Subject to the petitioner paying to the respondent the total outstanding amount towards the payment of the EMIs totalling Rs.5,66,944/- in the manner indicated below, there shall be a stay of the possession notice dated 17th November, 2021:
(i) Rs.1,00,000/- shall be paid by the petitioner to the respondent on or before 13th December, 2021;
(ii) Rs.2,00,000/- shall be paid by the petitioner to the respondent on or before 31st December, 2021; and
(iii) Balance amount of Rs.2,66,944/- shall be paid by the petitioner to the respondent on or before 31st January, 2022.
11. An undertaking with regard to the aforesaid payment shall be filed by the petitioner Sunil Jain within two days from today. Consequences of breach of the undertaking have been explained through the counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner.
12. It is made clear that if there is a default in the aforesaid payment schedule/undertaking, the stay order passed by this Court today shall automatically stand vacated and the Court appointed Receiver would be free to act in terms of the impugned possession notice dated 17th November, 2021, without any further recourse to this Court.
13. The petition and pending application stand disposed of in the above terms.
14. The aforesaid directions have been passed as an interim arrangement only on account of the non-functioning of the DRT. The SA and the interim application filed by the petitioner before the DRT shall be taken up for consideration as and when the said DRT becomes functional, uninfluenced Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:SHITU NAGPAL Signing Date:15.02.2022 19:04:24 CM(M) 1139/2021 Page 2 of 4 by any observations made in this order. The stay of the impugned possession notice dated 17th November, 2021 shall remain in operation till the SA/interim application filed on behalf of the petitioner is taken up for consideration by the DRT and shall be subject to orders that may be passed by the DRT.
15. The counsel for the petitioner may approach the respondent for regularization of the loan account after the aforesaid payments are made."
4. The petitioner made payment of the first instalment of ₹1,00,000/-, but thereafter filed an application [CM APPL. 958/2022] for extension of time. In the said application, the petitioner undertook to deposit the entire overdue amount of ₹4,66,944/- by 31.01.2022.
5. By an order dated 07.01.2022, the petitioner's request was accepted and the following order passed:
"4. Having heard the counsels for the parties, this Court deems it appropriate to grant extension of time to pay the entire outstanding amount of Rs.4,66,944/- by 31st January, 2022.
5. It is made clear that no further applications for extension of time shall be entertained. It is also made clear that if the aforesaid amount is not paid by 31 st January, 2022, the stay order passed by this Court shall automatically stand vacated and the Court appointed receiver shall be free to act as per the impugned possession notice, without any further recourse to this Court."
6. The petitioner has admittedly made no further payment since the aforesaid order was passed. In the present application, a further extension of time is sought on the ground that the petitioner is suffering from financial constraints and has not been able to generate the requisite funds.
7. I have heard Mr. Vishan Kumar Mishra, the attorney of the Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:SHITU NAGPAL Signing Date:15.02.2022 19:04:24 CM(M) 1139/2021 Page 3 of 4 petitioner, who sought permission to argue the application in person.
8. The application does not disclose any grounds for further extension of time. The circumstances of financial constraint were already agitated in CM APPL. 958/2022, which was allowed. The order dated 07.01.2022 specifically records that no further extension of time will be granted. There has been no material change in circumstances thereafter which would justify a departure from that order. In fact, the petitioner has not made any payment thereafter. Mr. Mishra also states that after the last order, the petitioner has not taken any steps to get the Securitisation Application listed before the DRT, which is now admittedly functional, as additional charge of the DRTs in Delhi have been vested in other DRTs.
9. In these circumstances, it is not possible for this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution to extend the time further. The application is therefore dismissed.
10. It is made clear that the rights and contentions of the parties in the Securitisation Application are reserved, which will be adjudicated by the DRT in accordance with law.
PRATEEK JALAN, J FEBRUARY 14, 2022 „hkaur‟ Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:SHITU NAGPAL Signing Date:15.02.2022 19:04:24 CM(M) 1139/2021 Page 4 of 4