Allowed

Orissa Gramya Bank v. Pradeep Kumar Padhi

DRAT11 Jul 2024MISC APPEAL/36/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this miscellaneous appeal under the SARFAESI Act, the Tribunal allowed the bank's plea for expeditious disposal of a Debt Recovery Tribunal application pending since 2021, directing the DRT to avoid adjournments and decide the matter urgently.

What did the court decide?

Directed the concerned DRT, Cuttack to decide S.A. No. 55 of 2021 expeditiously without granting unnecessary adjournments.

Orissa Gramya Bank versus Pradeep Kumar Padhi — Banking and Recovery | DRAT (2024)

¶1

¶2

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AT KOLKATA

¶3

Misc. Appl. No. 36 of 2024

¶4

THE HON’BLE JUSTICE SHRI ANIL KUMAR SRIVASTAVA, CHAIRPERSON

¶5

Order No. 08 11.07.2024

¶6

The Authorised Officer, Odisha Gramya Bank, having office at Gandamunda, Khandagiri, Bhubaneswar, Dist. Khurda – 751030.

¶7

--Vs--

¶8

Pradeep Kumra Padhi, residing at Keonjhar Colony, Tulasipur, Dist. Cuttack - 753008

¶9

... Respondent

¶10

For Appellant : Mr. Tuna Sahu, ld. adv. on virtual mode. For Respondent : Mr. Sambit Kr. Swain, ld. adv. on virtual mode.

¶11

THE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL :

¶12

Heard learned counsel for the parties on virtual mode and perused the records.

¶13

Misc Appeal No. 36 of 2024 filed by the appellant bank u/s 17(6) of the SARFAESI Act, 2002 for a direction to the concerned DRT, Cuttack for expeditious disposal of S.A. No. 55 of 2021.

¶14

Learned counsel for the appellant bank submits that an interim order was passed in favour of the SARFAESI applicant. Thereafter, on one or the other ground applicant is lingering on the proceeding. Even after the amendment application filed by the applicant was allowed on 25.01.2024, amendment is not carried out by the SARFAESI applicant. Hence, the prayer is made for a direction for expeditious disposal of the matter.

¶15

Learned counsel for the respondent herein, Mr. Sambit Kumar Swain, submits that the matter is regularly taken up for hearing by the learned DRT. Delay was caused due to Covid

¶16

¶17

pandemic and as there was no Presiding Officer posted in the DRT, Cuttack.

¶18

S.A. was filed in 2021. Thereafter, Presiding Officer was posted in 2022 in DRT, Cuttack. Order sheet shows that orders are being passed by the learned DRT, but SARFAESI applicant is not carrying out amendment as per order dated 25.01.2024. In such circumstances and since it is a SARFAESI application filed in 2021, I found it appropriate to direct the concerned DRT, Cuttack to decide the S.A. expeditiously.

¶19

Accordingly, Misc. Appeal No. 36 of 2024 is allowed. Learned DRT, Cuttack is directed to decide the S.A. 55 of 2021 expeditiously without granting any unnecessary adjournment to either of the parties as per its own roster.

¶20

File be consigned to record room.

¶21

Copy of the order be supplied to the appellant and the respondents and a copy be also forwarded to the concerned DRT.

¶22

Copy of the judgement/Final Order be uploaded in the Tribunal’s website.

¶23

Order dictated, signed and pronounced by me in the open Court on this the 11^th day of July, 2024.

¶24

(Anil Kumar Srivastava, J) Chairperson

¶25

Dated : 11.07.2024 08 /pkb

¶26

Orissa Gramya Bank v. Pradeep Kumar Padhi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Orissa Gramya Bank v. Pradeep Kumar Padhi

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

Authorised Officer Asrec (India) Limited versus Ms Eastern Metal and Ferro Alloys Limited

K Lakshma Reddy versus Bank of Baroda

Sri Manideep Sen versus Bank of Baroda

Ms Neelam Enterprises versus Bank of India

Indian Bank versus Ms Faizan and Sufian Bricks Enterprise and Ors.

Orissa Gramya Bank versus Ms Maa Shanti Paddy Processing Pvt. Ltd.