Disposed

M/S.Stapati Interiors (P) Ltd.,Puri v. Odisha Gramya Bank,Bbsr

Orissa HC10 Jun 2022WP(C)/14389/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this DPCons application, the High Court of Orissa granted permission to implead the Presiding Officer, DRT, Cuttack Bench, as an opposite party and disposed of the writ petition by directing the authority to determine a pending interlocutory application within four weeks without adjudicating the merits of the case.

What did the court decide?

Permission granted to implead the Presiding Officer, DRT, Cuttack; writ petition disposed directing disposal of pending interlocutory application within four weeks.

M/S.Stapati Interiors (P) Ltd.,Puri Vs Odisha Gramya Bank,Bbsr — Cheque Dishonour | Orissa HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

¶2

W.P.(C) No.14389 of 2022

¶3

M/s. Stapati Interiors (P) Ltd., Puri …. Petitioner

¶4

Mr. S.S. Das, Advocate

¶5

-versus-

¶6

Odisha Gramya Bank, …. Opp. Parties Bhubaneswar and others Mr. Tuna Sahu, Advocate

¶7

CORAM: JUSTICE S.K. SAHOO And JUSTICE MURAHARI SRI RAMAN ORDER Order No. 10.06.2022 02. This matter is taken up through Hybrid arrangement (video conferencing/physical mode). Learned counsel for the petitioner seeks permission to implead the Presiding Officer, Debts Recovery Tribunal, Cuttack Bench, Cuttack as opposite party no.6 in Court today.

¶8

Order No.

¶9

Permission is granted.

¶10

Heard Mr. S.S. Das, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Tuna Sahu, learned counsel for the opposite parties–Bank.

¶11

The petitioner has filed this writ petition with a prayer to quash the order dated 03.06.2022 passed

¶12

// 2 //

¶13

by the Recovery Officer, Debts Recovery Tribunal, Cuttack, the opposite party no.4 in Recovery Proceeding No.113 of 2015.

¶14

Mr. Tuna Sahu, learned counsel appearing for the Odisha Gramya Bank, Bhubaneswar submitted that the property has already been auctioned and sale certificate has been issued in favour of opposite party no.5 Visiontek Consultancy Services Private Limited represented by its Managing Director, Chandka Industrial Estate, Patia, Bhubaneswar, Khordha. He further submitted that the impugned order is appealable one and no appeal has yet been preferred. It appears from Annexure-15 that the outstanding loan dues against the petitioner as on 25.05.2022 is to the tune of Rs.4, 50,48,402.88 paise (rupees four crores fifty lakhs forty eight thousand eighty eight paisa) but the property in question was auctioned to the tune of Rs.4,55,70,000/-.

¶15

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the Recovery Officer on 03.06.2022 after considering the objection filed by the CDR against I.A. no.39 of 2022 and I.A. no.38 of 2022 disallowed the objection and rejected the same and the I.A. filed by the CHB has been allowed.

¶16

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that apart from the statutory appeal, an application has been filed for exemption of the statutory deposit as per section 30-A of the Recovery of Debts and

¶17

Page 2 of 3

¶18

// 3 //

¶19

Bankruptcy Act, 1993 which is subjudiced and a direction may be issued to the concerned authority to consider the same in accordance with law.

¶20

Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the respective parties, without entering into the merits of the case, we dispose of the writ petition directing the opposite party no.6- the Presiding Officer, Debts Recover Tribunal Cuttack Bench, Cuttack to dispose of the interlocutory application of the petitioner, if pending, within a period of four weeks from today in accordance with law after hearing all concerned.

¶21

¶22

Urgent certified copy of this order be granted on
proper application.
(S.K. Sahoo)
Vacation Judge
(M.S. Raman)
Vacation Judge

¶23

Page 3 of 3

M/S.Stapati Interiors (P) Ltd.,Puri v. Odisha Gramya Bank,Bbsr

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S.Stapati Interiors (P) Ltd.,Puri v. Odisha Gramya Bank,Bbsr

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

Pradip Kumar Pradhan Vs State of Odisha

Ananta Kumar Patra Vs State of Odisha

Bijan Kumar Parida Vs State of Odisha

Pradip Kumar Pradhan Vs State of Odisha

M/S. Kbm Construction, Puri Vs State of Orissa

Prakash Roadlines Corp. Ltd. Vs Union of India