Rajasthan High Court - Jaipur
Ms Kaishav Sulz Pvt Ltd And Ors vs Baroda Rajasthan Kshetriya And Ors on 29 May, 2018
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Civil Writs No. 11716/2018
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, Bhilwara, Th.
Bhilwara, Dist. Bhilwara, Rajasthan.
3. Smt. Mamta Vyas W/o. Shri Matish Vyas (Guarantor), U-
280, Azad Nagar, Bhilwara Th. Bhilwara Dist. Bhilwara,
Rajasthan.
4. Smt. Kamla Vyas W/o. Shri Narbada Shankar Vyas,
(Guarantor), C-530, Azad Nagar, Bhilwara, Th. Bhilwara,
Dist. Bhilwara, 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- 311 001.
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. Matish Vyas, petitioner No.2 present in person.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA Order 29/05/2018 (2 of 3) [CW-11716/2018] This Court vide order dated 18.01.2017 while disposing S.B.C.W.P. No.15691/2016 directed the DRT to hear the matter and dispose of the securitization application filed by the petitioner. In the meanwhile, it was directed that seal of the school of the petitioner shall be opened so that they may be enable to have the examination conducted.
The petitioner No.2 appearing in person submits that DRT after hearing the parties reserved the case for judgment, however after eight months the case was released for fresh hearing but no notice was issued about the fresh hearing to the petitioners or their counsel and in their absence the case was dismissed in default.
On information the petitioners filed restoration application which is pending for orders before the DRT since February 2018. It is submitted that the respondent Bank has been taking time for filing reply to it and in the meanwhile, the Bank has proceeded to take possession of the school at Bhilwara. As the DRT is not sitting regularly, the petitioners have approached this Court.
After perusal of the order sheets of DRT, Jaipur, I find that the contentions raised are correct. Time has been sought by the Bank to file reply. Case was listed on 22.05.2018 and now the same has been adjourned for 1st June, 2018.
Merely because the restoration application is pending, the petitioner cannot be deprived by this Court to hear regarding the issue. The respondents cannot be allowed to take advantage for their own fault of not filing reply to the restoration application.
Taking into consideration the order passed by this Court earlier dated 18.01.2017, I deem it proper to direct that the school premises of the petitioner shall not be taken over (3 of 3) [CW-11716/2018] possession nor any seal shall be put on the school only on account of the DRT case having been dismissed in default wherein restoration application is pending. It is made clear that if any seal has already been put on the school premises, the same shall be opened for peaceful functioning of the school.
The Presiding Officer, DRT, Jaipur is directed to decide the restoration application on the next date fixed by it i.e. 01.06.2018.
With the aforesaid observations, the writ petition is disposed of.
(SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA),J R.Vaishnav
94.