Rajan Khan v. Debts Recovery Tribunal, Cuttack

Orissa HC3 Feb 2025WP(C)/1187/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Orissa High Court writ direction for expeditious disposal of SARFAESI Section 17 application SA No.66 of 2023 pending over one year before DRT Odisha Cuttack; S.17(5) 60-day/four-month statutory limit noted; disposal directed preferably within three months with hearing to parties; petitioner an auction purchaser unable to take possession due to pendency; bench K.R. Mohapatra and S.K. Mishra, JJ.; order dated 03.02.2025.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the learned Presiding Officer, Debts Recovery Tribunal, Odisha, Cuttack to dispose of SA No.66 of 2023 in accordance with law as expeditiously as possible, preferably within three months from the date of production of the certified copy of the order, providing opportunity of hearing to the parties concerned; urgent certified copy to be granted on proper application. ¶¶21

Rajan Khan Vs Debts Recovery Tribunal, Cuttack — Banking and Recovery | Orissa HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶¶21

Issue for consideration

Whether the High Court should direct the Presiding Officer, Debts Recovery Tribunal, Odisha, Cuttack to dispose of SA No.66 of 2023 (filed under Section 17 of the SARFAESI Act, 2002) expeditiously.

¶¶14

Court's answer

The Court formed the considered opinion that expeditious steps for early disposal of the SA should be taken by the learned Presiding Officer, Debts Recovery Tribunal, Odisha, Cuttack, giving opportunity of hearing to the parties concerned.

¶¶19

Ratio / Principle

Sub-Section 5 of Section 17 of the SARFAESI Act, 2002 stipulates disposal of the Section 17 application within 60 days, with total pendency not to exceed four months; in the instant case the application had been pending for more than one year.

¶¶20

Key takeaways

The Court directed the learned Presiding Officer, Debts Recovery Tribunal, Odisha, Cuttack to dispose of SA No.66 of 2023 in accordance with law as expeditiously as possible, preferably within three months from the date of production of the certified copy of the order, providing opportunity of hearing to the parties concerned.ratio¶¶21

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ petition (W.P.(C) No.1187 of 2025, decided 03.02.2025, Coram: K.R. Mohapatra and S.K. Mishra, JJ.) by an auction purchaser seeking a direction for early disposal of SA No.66 of 2023 filed under Section 17 of the SARFAESI Act, 2002, pending before the Debts Recovery Tribunal, Odisha, Cuttack for more than one year despite Sub-Section 5 of Section 17 stipulating disposal within 60 days and maximum pendency of four months. Finding no legal impediment to hearing, the Court directed the Presiding Officer to dispose of SA No.66 of 2023 in accordance with law as expeditiously as possible, preferably within three months from production of the certified copy of the order, providing opportunity of hearing to the parties concerned.

¶1

Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: ROJALIN NAYAK Designation: JUNIOR STENOGRAPHER Reason: Authentication Location: HIGH COURT OF ORISSA, C UTT ACK Date: 03-Feb-2025 17:17:27

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

¶3

W.P.(C). NO.1187 OF 2025

¶4

Rajan Khan and another …. Petitioners

¶5

Mr. Nalini Kanta Dash, Advocate

¶6

-versus-

¶7

Debts Recovery Tribunal, Cuttack and others

¶8

…. Opp. Parties

¶9

CORAM: JUSTICE K.R. MOHAPATRA JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR MISHRA

Order No.

ORDER 03.02.2025

This matter is taken up through hybrid mode.

¶14

This writ petition has been filed for a direction to the Presiding Officer, Debts Recovery Tribunal, Odisha, Cuttack for early disposal of SA No.66 of 2023 filed under Section 17 of the Securitization And Reconstruction of Financial Assests And Enforcement of Security Interest Act (for brevity ‘the SARFAESI Act’), 2002.

¶15

Vide order dated 15^th January, 2025, this Court directed to Mr. Dash, learned counsel for the Petitioners to place on record the entire order sheet of the application filed under Section 17 the SARFAESI Act, 2002. Pursuant to such direction, learned counsel for the Petitioners places on record the order sheet of SA No.66 of 2023.

¶16

From the order sheet, it appears that since 28^th October, 2024, the matter is being adjourned to several dates for hearing. There appears no legal impediment for hearing of the case. It is submitted by Mr. Dash, learned counsel that the Petitioner is an auction purchaser. Due to pendency of the application, he is not in a position to take possession of the property in question.

¶17

Page 1 of 2

¶18

Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: ROJALIN NAYAK Designation: JUNIOR STENOGRAPHER Reason: Authentication Location: HIGH COURT OF ORISSA, C UTT ACK Date: 03-Feb-2025 17:17:27

¶19

On perusal of the order sheet, this Court is of the considered opinion that expeditious steps for early disposal of the SA should be taken by learned Presiding Officer, Debts Recovery Tribunal, Odisha, Cuttack giving opportunity of hearing to the parties concerned.

¶20

Sub-Section 5 of Section 17 of the SARFAESI Act, 2002 stipulates that the Tribunal having jurisdiction in the matter should dispose of the application within 60 days from the date of such application, however total pendency of such application with the Tribunal shall not exceed four months in any event. In the instant case, the application under Section 17 of the SARFAESI Act, 2002 is pending for more than one year.

¶21

Accordingly, it is directed that learned Presiding Officer, Debts Recovery Tribunal, Odisha, Cuttack shall dispose of SA No.66 of 2023 in accordance with law as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of three months from the date of production of certified copy of this order providing opportunity of hearing to the parties concerned.

¶22

Urgent certified copy of this order be granted on proper application.

¶23

(K.R. Mohapatra) Judge

¶24

Rojalin

¶25

(S.K.Mishra) Judge

¶26

Page 2 of 2

Rajan Khan v. Debts Recovery Tribunal, Cuttack

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajan Khan v. Debts Recovery Tribunal, Cuttack

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/S Swayam Prakash Filling Station, Bhadrak Vs Ao, Axis Bank Ltd., Bbsr

Bhagyabati Tripathy Vs M/S.Sarthak Builder

Motilal Sahu Vs Canara Bank, Karnataka

Rashmi Ranjan Mohapatra Vs P.N.B., Bbsr

Debasis Ghosh Vs the Ao. Cum Chief Manager, Pnb, Bbsr

Jahangir Alli Molla Vs RBI