Smt. Vijay Laxmi Shukul v. Union Bank of India and Ors.

I.A. No. 62/2022 In Appeal Dy. No. 444/2021 Date: 06.05.2022

Smt. Vijay Laxmi Shukul Vs. Union Bank of India and Ors.

Present: Shri Akshat Agarwal along with Shri V. K. Shukla, counsels for the appellant, Shri Sandeep Arora, counsel for the respondent-Bank, None for the other respondents,

Learned counsel for the appellant is pressing for restraining the respondent-Bank from dispossessing the appellant from the property in question.

Learned counsel for the respondent-bank submits that the DRT, Jabalpur has already passed the interim order in the securitization application filed by the borrower/mortgagor, therefore, no interim order is required to be passed.

Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the aforesaid order has not been passed in T.S.A. No. 02/2021 , but it has been passed in the proceedings of the borrower, but the learned counsel for the respondent submits that the borrower is son of the appellant.

Be that as it may, there is remedy open to the appellant to move appropriate application before the DRT, Jabalpur for redressal of her grievance, if any.

Learned counsel for the appellant states that the reply filed by the respondent no. 1 has not been served upon him in totality as annexures are missing.

Learned counsel for the respondent-bank is directed to serve a complete set of the reply to the learned counsel for the appellant within a week, who may file rejoinder to the same by the next date.