The Applicant filed a Sale Application for auction. The Law Officer for the Respondent Bank argued lack of tribunal jurisdiction due to the auction notice being issued under the HP Cooperative Bank Act instead of the SARFAESI Act. The Tribunal rejected the application.
Application rejected; file consigned to record room after compliance.
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.
DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-I, CHANDIGARH
SA/280/2025 DOLE RAM Vs HIMACHAL PRADESH STATE COOPERATIVE BANK LTD
20.11.2025
Item No.18
Present: Mr. Ankur Goyat, Counsel for the Applicant (on VC). Mr. Regan Kalate, Law Officer of the respondent bank.
Mr. Regan, Law Officer, has put in appearance on behalf of the respondent bank. He states that this Tribunal has no jurisdiction in the matter as the auction notice has not been issued under the SARFAESI Act, and it has been issued under the Himachal Pradesh Co-operative Agriculture and Rural Development Bank Act, 1979. Mr. Goyat, has failed to show that this Tribunal has the jurisdiction. In view of this, SA is rejected . File be consigned to record room after due compliance.
(A S Narang) Presiding Officer DRT-I, Chandigarh
PANKAJ
Dole Ram
Himachal Pradesh State Cooperative Bank Ltd
A S Narang
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
