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 1, Cited by 1]

Calcutta High Court

Loudon Properties (P) Limited vs India Sme Assets Reconstruction ... on 21 January, 2021

Author: Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya

Bench: Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya

OD - 6
                                ORDER SHEET

                              WPO 385 of 2020

                    IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
                       Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction
                              ORIGINAL SIDE



                LOUDON PROPERTIES (P) LIMITED
                            VS.
  INDIA SME ASSETS RECONSTRUCTION COMPANY LIMITED AND ORS



BEFORE:
The Hon'ble JUSTICE SABYASACHI BHATTACHARYYA
Date: 21st January, 2021

                                                                       Appearance:
                                                       Mr. Samrat Chowdhury, Adv.
                                                                  Ms. R. Seal, Adv.
                                                                 ...for the petitioner



         The Court: Despite service, none appears on behalf of the

respondents. Affidavit-of-service filed in Court is taken on record.

The petitioner's contention is that, despite having preferred an appeal before the Debts Recovery Tribunal against an order passed by the concerned Recovery Officer, and having filed ancillary applications, such appeal and applications have been kept pending for an inordinately long period, thereby causing severe prejudice to the petitioner.

Although there is no absolute bar to the exercise of jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India in spite of availability of alternative remedy, it has been held time and again that this Court abstains 2 from doing so under normal circumstances by virtue of self-imposed restriction when an equally efficacious alternative remedy is available in law.

However, for the sake of judicial propriety, it will be appropriate if the Tribunal disposes of the petitioner's appeal and applications expeditiously. Accordingly, WPO 385 of 2020 is disposed of by directing the Debts Recovery Tribunal - I, Kolkata, to dispose of interlocutory applications, bearing nos.674 of 2020 and 675 of 2020 and IA Nos. 676 of 2020 and 677 of 2020, pending before the said Tribunal in connection with Miscellaneous Appeal No.5 of 2019 and Miscellaneous Appeal No.1 of 2020, as expeditiously as possible, positively within a month from communication of this order to the Tribunal.

The petitioner shall communicate a server copy of this order to the concerned Tribunal at the earliest to ensure due compliance of the same.

There will be no order as to costs.

Urgent photostat certified copies of this order, if applied for, be made available to the parties upon compliance of all necessary formalities.

(SABYASACHI BHATTACHARYYA, J.) RS