Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 2, Cited by 0]

Rajasthan High Court - Jaipur

M/S Kaishav Sulz Pvt Ltd And Ors vs B R K Gramin Bank And Ors on 18 January, 2017

Author: Mohammad Rafiq

Bench: Mohammad Rafiq

 HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT
                      JAIPUR
             S. B. Civil Writ Petition No. 15691 / 2016
1. M/s Kaishav Sulz Private Limited, Regd. Office : Shop No. 80,
New Cloth Market, Pur Road, Bhilwara, Raj-311001 Through Shri
Matish Vyas, Director of M/s Kaishav Sulz Private Limited
2. Matish Vyas S/o Shri Narmada Shankar Vyas, aged about 40
Years, R/o U-280, Azad Nagar, Bhilara, Th. Bhilara, Dist. Bhilawra,
Rajasthan
3. Smt. Mamta Vyas W/o Shri Matish Vyas (Guarantor), U-280,
Azad Nagar, Bhilara, Th. Bhilara, Dist. Bhilawra, Rajasthan
4. Smt. Kamla Vyas W/o Shri Narbada Shankar Vyas (Guarantor),
C-530, Azad Nagar, Bhilara, Th. Bhilara, Dist. Bhilawra, Rajasthan
                                                      ----Petitioners
                               Versus
1. Baroda Rajasthan Kshetriya Gramin Bank, through Chairman,
Head Office : Citi Plaza, 1st Floor, Vaishali Nagar, Ajmer - 305004
2. Baroda Rajasthan Kshetriya Gramin Bank, through Regional
Manager, Regional Office : Lokpida Complex, 8 R.C. Vyas Colony,
Bhilwara, Rajasthan - 311001
3. Baroda Rajasthan Kshetriya Gramin Bank, Main Branch Nagori
Garden, through Manager, Bhilwara, Rajasthan
4. District Collector and District Magistrate, Bhilwara, Rajasthan
                                                    ----Respondents
_____________________________________________________
For Petitioner(s)   : Mr. Rajeev Surana.
For Respondent(s) : Mr. R.K. Salecha.
_____________________________________________________
          HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMAD RAFIQ
                               Order
18/01/2017

           This writ petition was entertained by this Court in a

situation when the Debts Recovery Tribunal(for short 'the DRT')

was not function at Jaipur and the examinations of students of the

petitioners' school were approaching near.        This Court while

issuing notice to respondents vide order dated 09.11.2016
                                   (2 of 3)
                                                                [CW-15691/2016]

directed that in the meantime, seal of the school of the petitioners

shall be opened so as to enable them to have the examinations

conducted. It was further directed that this would, however, not

prejudice right of the respondents to apply for vacation of stay

order.

           Mr. Rajeev Surana, learned counsel for the petitioners

argued that even though the petitioners have challenged the order

passed by the District Collector under                Section 14     of    the

Securitization    and    Reconstruction      of     Financial   Assets     and

Enforcement      of   Security   Interest    Act,    2002(for    short     'the

SARFAESI Act') before the DRT, but the DRT has not decided the

same and examinations approached near, therefore, the petitioner

had to file present writ petition. It is argued that the respondents

concealed the fact from the District Collector about earlier decision

of the DRT dated 02.09.2015 wherein it was held that respondent-

bank illegally declared account of the petitioners as NPA and

obtained order under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act.


           Mr. R.K. Salecha, learned counsel for the respondents

opposed the writ petition and submitted that while passing aforesaid order by the DRT holding that account of the petitioner was illegally declared as NPA, liberty was granted to the bank to again initiate proceedings under the SARFAESI Act. It is, therefore, that fresh proceedings were drawn and the premises of the petitioner was sealed and symbolic possession thereof was taken by the bank. The petitioners has already filed Securitization Application No. 32/2016 before the DRT, Jaipur against the fresh proceedings, which is also again questioned in the present (3 of 3) [CW-15691/2016] petition, which may not be entertained by this Court. It is informed that so far as earlier order passed by the DRT declaring action of the respondents in declaring account of the petitioner as NPA as illegal has been challenged by the respondents before the DRAT, but in any case, order which is impugned herein is also subject matter of challenge before the DRT, Jaipur which is going to hold its sitting at Jaipur from 23.01.2017 to 25.01.2017.

Having regard to the fact that subject matter of this writ petition is already pending consideration before the DRT, Jaipur, which is going to hold its sitting at Jaipur from 23.01.2017 onwards, this writ petition is disposed off directing Debts Recovery Tribunal, Jaipur to decide the Securitization Application No. 32/2016 filed by the petitioners and in doing so, if the Tribunal takes a view to dismiss the application, premises of the petitioner shall be again sealed subject to any further order that may be passed in subsequent proceedings assailing the order passed by the DRT.

Stay application and Application No. 60972/2016 also stand disposed off.

(MOHAMMAD RAFIQ)J. Manoj