Dismissed

Mrs. Hema Saini v. Recovery Officer-Ii Debts Recovery Tribunal-Iii and Anr.

Delhi HC16 May 2019W.P.(C)/5393/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner challenged the appointment of a Receiver to take possession of mortgaged property and a notice issued by the Receiver. The High Court dismissed the writ petition, holding the petitioner had statutory remedies before DRT/DRAT and that the question of forgery was a disputed fact precluding writ interference.

What did the court decide?

None. The writ petition was dismissed.

Mrs. Hema Saini Vs Recovery Officer-Ii Debts Recovery… — Property and Title | Delhi HC (2019)

¶1

$~144.

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

W.P.(C) 5393/2019 and CM No. 23693/2019 MRS. HEMA SAINI ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Pratap Sahani and Mr. M. Padhi, Advocates.

¶4

Versus RECOVERY OFFICER-II DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III AND ANR. ..... Respondents Through:

¶5

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIPIN SANGHI HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE REKHA PALLI

¶6

O R D E R

¶7

% 16.05.2019

¶8

CM No. 23694/2019

¶9

Exemption allowed subject to just exceptions.

¶10

The application stands disposed of.

¶11

W.P.(C) 5393/2019 and CM No. 23693/2019

¶12

The petitioner has preferred the present writ petition to assail the order dated 24.04.2019 passed by the Recovery Officer-II of the Debts Recovery Tribunal-III in RC No. 82/2016 PNB Vs. M/s Shivani Agro India whereby the Recovery Officer has appointed the Receiver to take over possession of the property of the petitioner bearing Khasra No. 683 and New No. 8421 situated at Basti Achhut, Qadam Sharif, now known as Arya Nagar, Pahar Ganj, New Delhi. The petitioner also assails the notice issued by the Receiver dated 10.05.2019 to take over possession of the said property.

¶13

Admittedly, the petitioner’s husband was initially arrayed as a defendant in the Original Application preferred by the respondent Bank. Upon demise of the petitioner’s husband, the petitioner was impleaded as a party defendant.

¶14

The Original Application preferred by the respondent Bank has since been allowed and a recovery certificate has been issued. The aforesaid property of the petitioner’s husband, was a mortgage property. Consequently, the Recovery Officer has directed to take over the possession of the property by the Receiver before the same could be sold in execution of the recovery certificate.

¶15

The submission of the petitioner is that the signatures of the petitioner’s late husband were forged in the mortgage document and this aspect is pending determination in case wherein the charge-sheet has been filed by the CBI and the trial is in progress.

¶16

The petitioner, therefore, seeks quashing of the order dated 24.04.2019 passed by the Recovery Officer and the letter dated 10.05.2019 issued by the Court Receiver.

¶17

We do not find any merit in this petition. Firstly, the petitioner has statutory remedy against the order dated 24.04.2019 before the DRT. If he is still aggrieved, he can approach the DRAT. Secondly, the petitioner is raising disputed question of facts which cannot be determined in this proceedings. Pertinently, the final order dated 02.02.2016 whereby the Original Application No. 141/2009 was allowed, has attained finality and we are informed that the petitioner did not assail the final order before the DRAT.

¶18

In these circumstances, we do not find any merit in this petition and the same is accordingly dismissed.

¶19

VIPIN SANGHI, J

¶20

REKHA PALLI, J

¶21

MAY 16, 2019/ kd

Mrs. Hema Saini v. Recovery Officer-Ii Debts Recovery Tribunal-Iii and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mrs. Hema Saini v. Recovery Officer-Ii Debts Recovery Tribunal-Iii and Anr.

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

Similar cases

Sanjaya Bahel Vs Union of India & Ors.

Ravinder Mann Vs the District Magistrate Office Complex and Ors.

Smt. Jatinder Badoghu Vs Govt. of NCT Delhi and Ors.

M/S Odeon Builders Pvt. Ltd. and Ors. Vs M/S Icici Bank Limited

Buddha Tri- Ratna Mission Vs Union of India & Ors.

Sh. Krishan Kumar Vs Union of India and Ors.

Ambuj Kumar Bharadwaj Vs Dedicated Freight Corridor Corporation of India Limited (Dfccil)

Sharda Devi Sanskrit Vidyapeeth Vs Ganesh Ram Bhatt and Anr.

M/S Odeon Builders Pvt. Ltd. and Ors. Vs M/S Icici Bank Limited

Delhi Agricultural Marketting Board Vs M/S H R Builders

Sudesh Lamba & Ors. Vs Manju Choudhry & Ors.

Mohinder Kaur Sahlot and Anr. Vs Union of India

Smt. Samta Sharma and Anr. Vs Registrar Cooperative Societies and Ors.

Madhya Pradesh Power Transmission Company Ltd. Vs Punjab and Sind Bank