Partly allowed

Arun v. Hinduja Housing Finance Ltd.

Delhi HC17 Feb 2025RFA/153/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order disposes of an appeal against rejection of plaint on bar under Section 34 of the SARFAESI Act and ancillary CM applications. The High Court declined ex-parte stay due to pending proceedings and allowed the withdrawal of the appeal and applications with liberty to move the DRT.

What did the court decide?

Appeal allowed subject to exceptions; subsequently dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to move application before Debt Recovery Tribunal.

Arun Vs Hinduja Housing Finance Ltd. — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Delhi HC (2025)

¶1

$~71

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- RFA 153/2025

¶4

ARUN .....Appellant

¶5

Through: Mr. Ankit Yadav, Advocate.

¶6

versus

¶7

HINDUJA HOUSING FINANCE LTD .....Respondent Through: None. CORAM:

¶8

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GIRISH KATHPALIA

¶9

O R D E R % 17.02.2025 [ Physical Hearing/Hybrid Hearing (as per request)] CM APPL. 9618/2025, 9616/2025 & 9619/2025 (exemption)

¶10

Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

¶11

CM APPL. 9617/2025 (exemption from filing decree sheet)

¶12

The appellant is directed to file certified copy of the decree sheet within two weeks. Accordingly, the application stands disposed of.

¶13

CM APPL. 9614/2025 (for seeking extension of time to file the court fees)

¶14

Subject to the appellant depositing the entire court fees within one week, the application is allowed.

¶15

CM APPL. 9613/2025 (for interim relief), CM APPL. 9615/2025 (for summoning of records), CM APPL. 9620/2025 (for additional documents) & RFA 153/2025

¶16

The appellant has assailed rejection of plaint in his suit for declaration and injunction. The plaint was rejected primarily on the ground of bar under

¶17

This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 01/07/2025 at 17:15:25

¶18

Section 34 of the SARFAESI Act.

¶19

Learned counsel for appellant presses for ex-parte stay, but looking into the nature of pleadings and the content of the impugned order coupled with the fact that according to the appellant, the Receiver has already initiated the proceedings by this time to take over possession in accordance with law, I do not find it a fit case to stay the proceedings ex-parte.

¶20

At this stage, learned counsel for appellant on instructions seeks permission to withdraw this appeal with liberty to move appropriate application before the Debt Recovery Tribunal. Accordingly, the appeal and pending applications are dismissed as withdrawn with liberty as sought.

¶21

GIRISH KATHPALIA, J

¶22

FEBRUARY 17, 2025/ ry

¶23

Click here to check corrigendum, if any

¶24

Arun v. Hinduja Housing Finance Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Arun v. Hinduja Housing Finance Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shagun Bagai and Anr. Vs Veena Luthra and Ors.

Jan Chetna Jagriti Avom Shaikshanik Vikas Manch & Ors. Vs Sh Anand Raj Jhawar Sole Proprietor of M/S Rr Agrotech

Safar Transport Corp. & Anr. Vs Dev Dutt Sharma

Anil Singh Vs Union of India through Ministry of Labour and Employment and Ors.

Deepak Malhotra Vs the State (Nct of Delhi) and Anr.

Panaesha Capital Pvt. Ltd. through Sandeep Phogat & Anr. Vs Danish Azim Qureshi