Appeal against an interim order directing status quo. Bench directed DRT to decide pending S.A. expeditiously within three months, referring to Apex Court judgment on trivial technical objections.
Direction to DRT to decide pending S.A. No. 171/2023 within three months expeditiously.
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.
Appeal Dy. No. 527/2023 Date: 05.07.2023
Asset Reconstruction Company India Ltd. Vs. Sanjai Kumar Srivastava @ Sanjay
Present: Shri K. M. Asthana, counsel for the appellant,
Heard the learned counsel for the appellant.
The present appeal has been filed under section 18 of the SARFAESI Act against the interim order dated 17.03.2023 passed by the DRT, Lucknow in S.A. No. 171/2023, whereby the Tribunal below has directed the parties to maintain the status quo. It has been contended on behalf of the S.A.applicant that the Bank had issued two notices under section 13(2) of the SARFAESI Act on different dates i.e. 12.06.2021 and 06.12.2021 claiming different amounts, which is not permissible in the eye of law. It has been further contended that pursuant to the first sale notice, the Bank has proceeded to sell the property in question, therefore, a request was made before the Tribunal below for restraining the Bank from issuing the sale certificate. The matter is still pending to be examined by the Tribunal in S.A. No. 171/2023.
Learned counsel for the appellant has further relied upon a judgment passed by the Hon’ble Apex Court in L&T Housing Finance Limited Vs. Trishul Developers & Anr., (2020) 10 SCC 659 in support of his contention and has referred to para 20 & 21 of the said judgment, wherein the Hon’ble Apex Court has held that the objection raised by the respondent was trivial and technical in nature and the appellant(secured creditor) has complied with the procedure prescribed under the SARFAESI Act and such trivial and technical objection cannot be taken into consideration.
In view of the above, the appeal stands finally disposed off with direction upon the Presiding Officer, DRT, Lucknow to consider and decide the S.A. No. 171/2023, which is stated to be pending, in accordance with law most expeditiously, preferably within three months from the date of production of certified copy of this order. The Tribunal below shall also consider the aforesaid judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court while deciding the S.A. finally.
Justice R. D. Khare Chairperson
Anupam
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the DRT below should be directed to dispose of the pending Section 18 appeal expeditiously while considering the Supreme Court judgment in L&T Housing Finance.
Whether trivial and technical objections regarding the issuance of notice under section 13(2) and the status of property sale can be ignored as held by the Hon'ble Apex Court.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
L&T Housing Finance Limited Vs. Trishul Developers & Anr.Referred¶6
L&T Housing Finance Limited Vs. Trishul Developers & Anr., (2020) 10 SCC 659 · Who else cites this
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Asset Reconstruction Company India Ltd.
Sanjai Kumar Srivastava @ Sanjay
R. D. Khare
Anupam
As recorded by the court registry
3 orders share this CNR
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
