In Writ Petition No. 7796 of 2018, the High Court of Bombay at Birmingham dismissed the petition holding that an efficacious remedy exists before the Debt Recovery Tribunal.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Urmila Ingale
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO. 7796 OF 2018
Moses Anthony D'Silva and anr. .. Petitioners Vs. State of Maharashtra and ors. .. Respondents
Mr. P. G.Sabnis i/b Mr.Jayant B. Apte, for the Petitioners. Mr. Vivek S. Sawant, for Respondents No. 3 & 4. Mr.A.A.Alaspurkar, AGP for Respondents No. 1 & 2 - State.
CORAM : A.A.SAYED &
M.S.KARNIK, JJ. DATE : 25th JULY 2018
P.C. :
. Inasmuch as the Petitioners have an alternate
efficacious remedy before DRT, we are not inclined to entertain
the Petition. The Petition shall accordingly stands dismissed.
1/2
secured creditors. He submits that the other DRTs are entertaining Securitization Applications of borrowers without insisting on first handing over possession of the secured asset to the secured creditors. It is expected of DRT to prima facie consider the merits of the matter while deciding the Interim Applications in the Securitization Applications if filed by the Petitioners.
3. The Writ Petition is disposed of.
(M.S.KARNIK, J.) (A.A.SAYED, J.)
2/2
1 issue framed by the court
Whether this court should entertain a writ petition challenging the maintainability of applications before the Debt Recovery Tribunal.
Moses Anthony D'Silva
State of Maharashtra
A.A.SAYED
M.S.KARNIK
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
