Allowed

Jm Financial Asset Reconstruction Company Limited and Anr. v. Veer Gurjar Aluminium Industries Pvt. Ltd.

DRAT16 Mar 2023MISC APPLICATION/2/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order restores a disposed transfer petition to the Tribunal's files. The original disposal was based on erroneous assumptions about jurisdictional limits which were subsequently stayed by the High Court. In the interest of justice, the Tribunal allowed the restoration application and posted the matter for a merits hearing.

What did the court decide?

M.A. No. 2/2023 allowed; Transfer Petition No. 5/2022 restored to file and posted for hearing on 12.04.2023.

Jm Financial Asset Reconstruction Company Limited… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | DRAT (2023)

¶1

BEFORE THE DEBTS RECOVERY APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, AT: MUMBAI Present: Mr Justice Ashok Menon, Chairperson

¶2

M.A. No. 2/2023(Restoration) In

¶3

(Transfer Petition No. 5/2022-Disposed of)

¶4

Between

¶5

JM Financial Asset Reconstruction Company … Appellant/s Ltd. & Anr.

¶6

V/s.

¶7

Veer Gurjar Aluminium Industries Pvt. Ltd. …Respondent/s

¶8

Mr Rohit Gupta, i/b M/s T. N. Tripathi & Co., Advocate for Appellants.

¶9

Mr. Rajesh Nagori, i/B Ms. Sanjana Ghogare, Advocate for Respondent.

¶10

-: Order dated: 16/03/2023:-

¶11

The matter is taken up for hearing by way of Praecipe filed by the Appellant seeking urgent relief. Heard the Ld. Counsel for the parties.

¶12

The transfer petition was disposed of for the reason that subsequent to a notification that had come from the Government, the jurisdiction of the cases of ₹100 crores and above, would have stood transferred to D.R.T.-I, Mumbai. Hence the prayer for the transfer of the matter from DRT Aurangabad to DRT Mumbai was found unnecessary, and the transfer petition was disposed of.

¶13

¶14

However, subsequently, there was a stay by the Hon’ble High Court of Bombay, Bench Aurangabad staying the operation of the GO by which the jurisdiction sought to be exercised by the GO came to be stalled and hence, the disposal of the transfer petition did not have the desired effect.

¶15

The Ld. Counsel appearing for the Appellant, therefore, wants that the transfer petition be restored to the files of this Tribunal. The Ld. Counsel appearing for the Respondent has opposed the application but has not filed any written reply.

¶16

After having heard both sides I, find that the transfer petition was disposed of on technical grounds. Which did not have the desired effect therefore, in the interest of justice it is appropriate and proper that the transfer petition be restored to file and be heard on its merits and hence, the M.A. No. 2/2023 for restoration of Transfer Petition No. 5/2022 is allowed and the transfer petition shall be posted for hearing on 12.04.2023.

¶17

rm-8

¶18

Jm Financial Asset Reconstruction Company Limited and Anr. v. Veer Gurjar Aluminium Industries Pvt. Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jm Financial Asset Reconstruction Company Limited and Anr. v. Veer Gurjar Aluminium Industries Pvt. Ltd.

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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Dinesh Gandaji Lakhvara and Ors. versus a U Small Finance Bank Ltd. and Ors.

Mr. Usmani Amjad Mukhtar and Anr. versus Hdfc Ltd.

Indian Bank versus Ross Murarka ( India ) Private Limited & Ors.

The Karad Urban Cooperative Bank Limited versus Shirish Lalaso Pawar

The Karad Urban Cooperative Bank Limited versus Shirish Lalaso Pawar

Aspire Home Finance Corporation Ltd. versus Prakash Puniya