Sukamal Adhikari v. Hdb Financial Services Ltd.
Case brief
What is this about?
The Tribunal dismissed an appeal where the appellant challenged a lower court order staying eviction proceedings under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act. The court held the appellant failed to prove a valid lease deed existed. The appeal lacked merit.
What did the court decide?
The appeal was dismissed and the impugned order of the DRT confirming the decline of stay was confirmed.
What the court decided
Reportable/ Not Reportable
IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AT KOLKATA
(Misc. Appeal Dy. No. 1029 of 2024) (Arising out of S.A. No. 566 of 2024 in DRT – 3 Kolkata)
THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SRIVASTAVA
CHAIRPERSON
- Sukamal Adhikari, son of Late Satish Chandra Adhikari, Proprietor of “The Artisan” having its office at 107A, B. B. Ganguly Street, Kolkata -700012, West Bengal.
…Appellants
-Versus-
- HDB Financial Services Ltd., having its Registered Office at 258/4, A.P.C. Road, Maniktala, Kolkata -700006.
- Authorized Officer, HDB Financial Services Ltd., having its Registered Office at 258/4, A.P.C. Road, Maniktala, Kolkata – 700006.
- M/s. Aspolight Vyapar Pvt. Ltd. at 13, British India Street, Kolkata -700069.
Issues for consideration
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the appellants have a valid tenancy right to prevent eviction under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act, 2002.
Whether the absence of a valid registered lease deed defeats the appellants' claim of tenancy.
Whether the DRT was right in dismissing the stay application against eviction proceedings.
Parties & counsel
- appellant
Sukamal Adhikari
- respondent
HDB Financial Services Ltd.
- respondent
M/s. Aspolight Vyapar Pvt. Ltd.
Coram
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
- Court
- DRAT
- Decided on
- · December
- CNR
- 191090010292024
- Topic
- Banking and Recovery
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court