The applicant challenged a Sale Notice under Section 17 of the SARFAESI Act, alleging lack of demand notice. The Court dismissed the application as infructuous because no auction took place and a prior application on the same cause exists.
Application under Section 17 of the SARFAESI Act set at naught; other proceedings disposed of.
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.
..
1
SA02of 2022 [J]
DRT,PATNA
DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL PATNA
Presiding Officer: Shri KaushalendraYadav
SA- 02 of 2022
.........Applicants
Versus
--respondent
Present:
| Forthe Applicant | : Sh.PunyatmaTiwary, Advocate |
|---|---|
| For the respondents Bank | : Sh.Umapati Jha,Advocate |
Dated: 14.07.2023
JUDGMENT
2
SA 02 of 2022 [J]
DRT,PATNA
under challenge could not take place. The only relief sought was to set aside the aforesaid action Notice which was not acted upon on the date mentioned thereunder. As such the prayer has become infructuous. Apart from this the applicant no.1 had already filed another S. application No. 129/2019. The dual proceeding for the same causeof account cannot run simultaneously.
ORDER
The application under Section 17 of the SARFAESIAct (S.A.02/2022)is dismissed.All pending lAsfiled, if any in the matter shall stand disposed of.
A copy of this Judgment be sent to the parties aswell as be also uploaded on the e-DRTportal.
[KaushalendraYadav] Presiding Officer Debts RecoveryTribunal, Patna
Judgment signed, sealed, dated and pronounced in the open court on this 14THDay of July, 2022.
V~";' [KaushalendraYadav]
PresidingOfficer Debts RecoveryTribunal, Patna
DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL, PATNA
| SI. No. |
Date of Order or Proceedings |
Order with the signature of the Court | Office action taken with date |
|---|---|---|---|
| SA02 of 2022 | |||
| 14.07.2023 | Judgment/Order written on separate sheets, pronounced in the open Court and kept on the case file. V Presiding Officer |
2 issues framed by the court
Whether an application seeking to set aside a sale notice should be allowed when no auction has taken place since the notice was not acted upon.
Whether a second application challenging the same cause of action while another is pending should be entertained.
2 provisions across 1 enactments
Satya Narayan Thakur and others
Authorised Officer, Union Bank of India
Kaushalendra Yadav
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
