Dismissed

Union Bank of India,Stressed Assets Mgmt.Branch Thru. Auth.Officer/Chief Manager Rajeev Kumar Verma v. Debt Recovery Tribunal,Lko. Thru. Its Presiding Officer and 2 Others

Allahabad HC4 Oct 2024/4774/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Union Bank of India challenged a notice issued by the Debt Recovery Tribunal under Article 227, alleging invalidity. The High Court held the petition not maintainable as notice recipients appeared before the Tribunal and raised objections without challenging the notice this court.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition was dismissed as it was held to be not maintainable.

Union Bank of India,Stressed Assets… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:68746

¶2

Court No. - 19

¶3

Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 4774 of 2024

¶4

Petitioner :- Union Bank Of India,Stressed Assets Mgmt.Branch Thru. Auth.Officer/Chief Manager Rajeev Kumar Verma

¶5

Respondent :- Debt Recovery Tribunal,Lko. Thru. Its Presiding Officer And 2 Others

¶6

Counsel for Petitioner :- Ganga Sagar Misra,Anchal Shukla

¶7

Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J.

¶8

Heard Sri G.S. Mishra, the learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the records.

¶9

By means of the instant petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India the petitioner-Union Bank of India has challenged the validity of an order dated 14.10.2020, passed by the Debt Recovery Tribunal in Criminal Misc. Contempt Application No.7 of 2020.

¶10

The document referred as an order dated 14.10.2020 is in fact a notice of an application under Section 17 of Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 issued to four persons asking them to appear before the Tribunal on 23.10.2020. The notice has been issued by the Registrar of the Debt Recovery Tribunal.

¶11

Copy of order sheet of the case before the Debt Recovery Tribunal indicates that on 15.03.2023 the bank's counsel had submitted that a reply had already been filed wherein objections against maintainability of the application were also raised. The said reply is still pending before the learned Tribunal.

¶12

When the persons, to whom the notice was issued on

¶13

14.10.2020 have already appeared before the Debt Recovery Tribunal and have filed their objections and they have not challenged the validity of the notice issued against them before this court, this petition filed by the Union Bank of India challenging the notices issued to four persons is not maintainable.

¶14

Accordingly, the petition is dismissed being not maintainable.

¶15

[Subhash Vidyarthi, J.]

¶16

Order Date :- 4.10.2024 Ram.

¶17

Digitally signed by :- RAM SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Union Bank of India,Stressed Assets Mgmt.Branch Thru. Auth.Officer/Chief Manager Rajeev Kumar Verma v. Debt Recovery Tribunal,Lko. Thru. Its Presiding Officer and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Union Bank of India,Stressed Assets Mgmt.Branch Thru. Auth.Officer/Chief Manager Rajeev Kumar Verma v. Debt Recovery Tribunal,Lko. Thru. Its Presiding Officer and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Ram Prakash Giri Vs Rakesh Giri and 7 Others

Santram Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue Lko. and 6 Others

Vishnu Kumar and 6 Others Vs Deputy Director of Consolidation, Pratapgarh and 2 Others

Panna Lal Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Revenue Lko. and 3 Others

Bindu Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue Deptt. Lko. and 2 Others

Bindu Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue Deptt. Lko. and 2 Others