Disposed¶22

Sunil Katyal v. Tushar Dev & Anr.

Delhi HC9 Mar 2026W.P.(C)/2925/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Sunil Katyal v. Tushar Dev & Anr.; W.P.(C) 2925/2026; CM APPL. 14118/2026; CM APPL. 14117/2026 exemption; Delhi High Court; Vivek Chaudhary J; Renu Bhatnagar J; 09.03.2026; Article 226; Article 227; Constitution of India 1950; Debt Recovery Tribunal-II New Delhi; DRT; T.S.A. No. 121/2022; Tushar Dev v. Karvy Financial Services Limited; Securitization Application; DRAT; Appeal No. 292/2024 pending admission; urgency application; expedited decision without adjournments; petition disposed; liberty to respondent No.2.

What did the court decide?

Petition and pending applications disposed of; petitioner permitted to move an urgency application before the concerned DRAT (with an expectation of expedited consideration without unnecessary adjournments); respondent No.2 granted liberty to move a similar application before the concerned DRAT.

Sunil Katyal Vs Tushar Dev & Anr. — Writ and Judicial Review | Delhi HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶22

Issue for consideration

How the writ petition seeking quashing of the DRT-II Impugned Order should be dealt with, given that the petitioner has already filed Appeal No. 292/2024 against the same order before the DRAT, pending admission.

¶19

Court's answer

Since an appeal against the Impugned Order is already pending before the DRAT, the petitioner is permitted to move an appropriate application with regard to their urgency before the concerned DRAT.

¶20

Ratio / Principle

Exemption application CM APPL. 14117/2026 allowed subject to all just exceptions and stands disposed of.

¶13

Key takeaways

Once such application is filed, the Court expects the concerned DRAT to consider and decide it expeditiously, without granting unnecessary adjournments.ratio¶21
With the aforesaid observation, the petition along with pending applications, if any, is disposed of.ratio¶22
In the meantime, respondent No.2 is granted liberty to move a similar application before the concerned DRAT.ratio

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Delhi at New Delhi (Vivek Chaudhary and Renu Bhatnagar, JJ.), order dated 09.03.2026 in W.P.(C) 2925/2026 & CM APPL. 14118/2026 — Sunil Katyal, petitioner (no appearance recorded), sought under Article 226 read with Article 227 of the Constitution of India, 1950 to quash the order dated 18.09.2024 passed by the Debt Recovery Tribunal-II, New Delhi in Securitization Application T.S.A. No. 121/2022, titled 'Tushar Dev. v. Karvy Financial Services Limited.' Counsel for the petitioner submitted that Appeal No. 292/2024 challenging the Impugned Order had already been filed before the Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal (DRAT) and was pending admission. The Court permitted the petitioner to move an appropriate urgency application before the concerned DRAT, expected the DRAT to decide it expeditiously without unnecessary adjournments, granted respondent No.2 similar liberty, and disposed of the petition with pending applications. Exemption application CM APPL. 14117/2026 was allowed subject to all just exceptions and disposed of. No substantive adjudication on the DRT order was made by this Court.

¶1

$~45

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- W.P.(C) 2925/2026 & CM APPL. 14118/2026

¶4

SUNIL KATYAL .....Petitioner

¶5

Through: Appearance not given.

¶6

versus

¶7

TUSHAR DEV & ANR. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Saurabh Seth, Ms. Neelam Preet Kaur, Mr. Abhiroop Rathore, Mr. Kabir Dev, Mr. Sukhvir Singh, Advs.

¶8

CORAM:

¶9

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIVEK CHAUDHARY HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE RENU BHATNAGAR

¶10

O R D E R

¶11

% 09.03.2026

¶12

CM APPL. 14117/2026 ( Exemption )

¶13

Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

¶14

The application stands disposed of.

¶15

W.P.(C) 2925/2026

¶16

The present writ petition has been filed under Article 226 read with Article 227 of the Constitution of India, 1950 seeking quashing the Impugned Order dated 18.09.2024 (hereinafter referred to as “Impugned Order”) passed by the Learned Debt Recovery Tribunal-II, New Delhi (hereinafter „DRT‟) in Securitization Application bearing T.S.A. No. 121/2022 titled „ Tushar Dev. v. Karvy Financial Services Limited. ‟

¶17

This is a digitally signed order.

¶18

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 12/03/2026 at 13:52:09

¶19

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he has already filed an appeal no. 292/2024 challenging the Impugned Order before the learned Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal (DRAT) which is still pending for admission.

¶20

In view of the same, the petitioner is permitted to move an appropriate application with regard to their urgency before the concerned DRAT.

¶21

As soon as the application is filed, we expect that the concerned DRAT to consider and decide the said application expeditiously, without granting any unnecessary adjournments.

¶22

With the aforesaid observation, the petition along with pending applications, if any, is disposed of.

¶23

In the meantime, the respondent No.2 also prays for and is granted liberty to move a similar application before the concerned DRAT.

¶24

VIVEK CHAUDHARY, J

¶25

RENU BHATNAGAR, J

¶26

MARCH 9, 2026 /bs/my

¶27

This is a digitally signed order.

¶28

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 12/03/2026 at 13:52:09

Sunil Katyal v. Tushar Dev & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sunil Katyal v. Tushar Dev & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sitaram Aggarwal Vs Punjab National Bank and Anr.

Ravi Kumar Tripathi & Ors. Vs Principal District and Sessions Judge Headquarters Tis Hazari District Courts Delhi

Nitin Sarna Vs Department of Transport

Vikas Mishra Vs Municipal Corporation of Delhi

Tejinder Pal Singh Bhinder Vs Chief Controller of Accounts & Ors.

Kamal Garg Director of Breek Construction Pvt. Ltd. Vs South Indian Bank Ltd. & Ors.

Dr. Kumud Bharti Vs Govt. of NCT of Delhi and Ors.

Suman Sharma Vs Municipal Corporation of Delhi & Ors.

Nuray Realtech Private Limited Vs Punjab and Sind Bank & Ors.

Himanshita Designer Floors Pvt. Ltd. Vs Punjab National Bank & Anr.

Priya Das Vs Lokpal of India through the Registrar

Hdfc Bank Limited Vs M/S Morning Maidens Pvt. Ltd. & Ors.

Parveen Pal Bajaj Vs Shri Sunil Bajaj and Ors.

Archana Chopra Vs Anuj Guglani and Ors.