Dismissed

Abhishek Kumar v. The Authorized Officer Cum Chief Manager Syndicate Bank and Ors.

Patna HC8 Aug 2016CWJC/1093/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed the writ petition challenging an order passed by the Debts Recovery Tribunal, observing that the impugned order is amendable to the appellate jurisdiction of the DRT, making an inquiry into merits unnecessary.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition stands dismissed with liberty to approach the Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal.

Abhishek Kumar Vs The Authorized Officer Cum Chief… — Banking and Recovery | Patna HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

¶2

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.1093 of 2016

¶3

============================================================ Abhishek Kumar, Son of Sri Parmanand Srivastava, Resident of Mohalla - Gandhi Nagar, Road No. 4, Kolhua Paigambarpur Bairiya, P.O. + P.S. - Ahiyapur, Town and District - Muzaffarpur, Pin 803108.

¶4

.... .... Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

The Authorized officer-cum-Chief Manager Syndicate Bank, Tirhut Canal Division, Ram Dayalu Nagar, Muzaffarpur - 842002. 2. The Zonal Manager, Syndicate Bank, Zonal Office, Maurya Lok Complex, Opposite Heera Palace, Patna - 800001.

¶7

Presiding Officer, Debts Recovery Tribunal, For the State of Bihar at Patna

¶8

.... .... Respondents

¶9

===========================================================

¶10

Appearance :

¶11

For the Petitioner : Mr. Ebrahim Kabir, Advocate For the Respondents : Mr. Siddharth Harsh, Advocate

¶12

===========================================================

¶13

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIKASH JAIN ORAL JUDGMENT

¶14

Date: 08-08-2016

¶15

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondents.

¶16

This writ petition has been filed for quashing the order dated 09.09.2015 passed in S.A. No. 128 of 2015 by the Presiding Officer, Debts Recovery Tribunal, Patna; and for a further direction to quash entire proceeding initiated by the bank under the provisions of the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (in short, “SARFAESI Act”).

¶17

At the very outset, this Court takes note that the impugned order dated 09.09.2015 passed by the Debts Recovery Tribunal is amenable to the appellate jurisdiction of the Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal in terms of the provisions of the

¶18

Patna High Court CWJC No.1093 of 2016 dt.08-08-2016

¶19

2/2

¶20

SARFAESI Act.

¶21

Learned counsel for the petitioner has not been able to show otherwise.

¶22

In the above view of the matter, this Court is not inclined to enter into the merits of the claims raised in the writ petition which accordingly stands dismissed, with liberty to the petitioner to approach the appropriate forum in accordance with law.

¶23

Needless to say, the present judgment shall not stand in the way of the petitioner in approaching the respondent-bank for consideration of any offer for payment of his outstanding dues which may be considered on its own merit.

¶24

It is made clear that in case such an appeal is filed, the concerned authority would have regard to the present proceeding being pursued by the petitioner while considering any issue relating to condonation of delay, if applicable.

¶25

(Vikash Jain, J)

¶26

B.T/-Chandran

¶27

AFR/NAFR	NAFR
CAV DATE	N/A
Uploading Date	09.08.2016
Transmission Date	N/A

Abhishek Kumar v. The Authorized Officer Cum Chief Manager Syndicate Bank and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Abhishek Kumar v. The Authorized Officer Cum Chief Manager Syndicate Bank and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Naween Kumar Vs The Union Of India and Ors.

Devanand Poddar Vs The Union Of India and Ors.

M/S Bss Projects Private Limit Vs the State of Bihar and Ors.

Nisu Giri @ Nishu Kumar Giri Vs The State Of Bihar

M/s Sri Ram Enterprises Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Mithilesh Kumar Roy Vs The State Of Bihar