Madhya Pradesh High Court
Extol Education Society vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 22 February, 2022
Author: Sheel Nagu
Bench: Sheel Nagu, Maninder Singh Bhatti
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SHEEL NAGU
&
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MANINDER SINGH BHATTI
ON THE 22nd OF FEBRUARY, 2022
WRIT PETITION No. 29232 of 2021
Between:-
1. EXTOL EDUCATION SOCIETY THR. ITS
AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE MS DIVYA
SAXENA D/O R.C. SAXENA A/A 35 OCCUPATION
PRIVATE JOB OFFICE AT 103 RAM BHAWAN
BERKHERI BHOPAL (MADHYA PRADESH)
2. EXTOL INSTITUTE OF MANAGEMENT THROUGH
PRINCIPAL DR.VIDHI VERMA D/O LATE
SHRI.G.K.VERMA AGE 46 2 AND 3 MAIN MARKET
JAHANGIRABAD (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....PETITIONERS
(BY SHRI ANUJ SHRIVASTAVA, ADVOCATE )
AND
1. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THR. THE
DISTRICT MAGISTRATE BHOPAL (MADHYA
PRADESH)
2. INDIABULLS HOUSING FINANCE FINANCE
L I M I T E D THROUGH AUTHORIZED OFFICER
HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT M 62 AND 63
1ST FLOOR CONNAUGHT PLACE NEW DELHI
(DELHI)
3. M/S XYRON TECHNOLOGIES LIMITED THROUGH
C H A I R M A N 103 BERKHEDI ROAD
JEHANGIRABAD (MADHYA PRADESH)
4. JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE FIRST CLASS DISTRICT
AND SESSIONS COURT DISTT.BHOPAL (MADHYA
PRADESH)
5. THE COURT COMMISSIONER (CASE NO. M.J.C.R.
NO. 283 OF 2021 ) DISTRICT AND SESSIONS COURT
DISTT.BHOPAL (MADHYA PRADESH)
6. G.K.BHATNAGAR S/O LATE REGHUVIR SARAN
BHATNAGAR , AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, 1/3
AMALTAS COMPLEX SHAHPURA (MADHYA
PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENTS
(BY SHRI RAJESH MAINDERETTA, RESPONDENT NO.2)
Signature Not Verified
SAN
This petition coming on for hearing this day, JUSTICE SHEEL NAGU
Digitally signed by SHUBHAM THAKKER
Date: 2022.02.24 16:47:24 IST
passed the following:
2
ORDER
The petitioner which is an Education Society running a college in a leased out premises which is a secured asset in regard to which mortgage deed had been executed between the respondent No.2 and the borrower/respondent No.3 and 6.
Learned counsel for the petitioner/lease holder relying upon the decision of the Apex Court in the case of Harshad Govardhan Sondagar Vs. International Assets Reconstruction Company Ltd. and Ors. (2014) 6 SCC 1 and Bajarang Shyamsunder Agrawal Vs. Central Bank of India and Another (2019) 9 SCC 94 submits that unless the lease is determined in terms of provision therein and the provisions of Transfer of Property Act, the lessee who is in occupation of the secured asset cannot be evicted provided lease in question was executed prior to the execution of mortgage deed in question which appears to be the case herein.
Be that as it may, the petitioner has filed a securitization application bearing No.25/22 in the DRT on 31.12.2021 but since the DRT is non functional, the same was not taken up.
Learned counsel for the rival parties do not dispute that appointment on the post of Presiding Officer, DRT at Jabalpur is likely to take place very soon.
Accordingly, no useful purpose shall be served to keep this petition pending, especially when the petitioners interest have already been protected by an interim order passed on 06.01.2022 in this petition.
Accordingly, this petition stands disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to pursue the remedy of securitisation application bearing No. 25/22 already availed by him before DRT, Jabalpur Till the DRT, Jabalpur takes up the S.A. on the question of admission and IR, the interim order passed by this Court on 06.01.2022 shall remain in operation but shall not influence the DRT in any manner to pass a different order if the occasion or the circumstances so requires.
Accordingly, the petition stands disposed of.
Signature Not Verified SAN Digitally signed by SHUBHAM THAKKER Date: 2022.02.24 16:47:24 IST (SHEEL NAGU) (MANINDER SINGH BHATTI)
JUDGE JUDGE
3
Shub
Signature Not Verified
SAN
Digitally signed by SHUBHAM THAKKER
Date: 2022.02.24 16:47:24 IST