Auction purchaser's appeal sought stay of handing over possession of property sold under a DRT proceeding, citing pendency before DRAT and alleged collusion between the bank and purchaser. The Division Bench held no stay was warranted absent any DRAT interim order and dismissed the appeal in limine.
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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Letters Patent Appeal No.482 of 2024 In
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.6575 of 2023
======================================================
M/S Jai Hanuman Aggrotech Private Ltd. a company registered under the Companies Act having its regional office Village Madhaipur, via Vidyapatinagar, P.S.- Daisinghsarai, District- Samastipur-848503 through one of the director Sri Ajit Kumar @ Ajeet Kumar.
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr.Krishna Kant Singh, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr.Rajan Ghoshrave, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR ORAL JUDGMENT (Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE)
Date : 14-05-2024
The appellant is concerned with the judgment of the learned Single Judge, which directed the District Magistrate, Samastipur to consider the application made by the writ petitioner-Bank to assist handing over physical possession of a property to the purchaser, as purchased in a proceeding before the Debt Recovery Tribunal (DRT). The 5th Respondent’s henchmen were said to be obstructing such handing over of
Patna High Court L.P.A No.482 of 2024 dt.14-05-2024 2/4
possession, consistently, despite the sale deed having been executed under a valid proceeding before the Debt Recovery Tribunal (DRT) and there was no stay obtained from the Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal (DRAT).
Patna High Court L.P.A No.482 of 2024 dt.14-05-2024 3/4
Article 226 to interfere with the proceedings validly initiated by a financial institution before the DRT. In the present case, impugned judgment of the learned Single Judge clearly details the various attempts taken by the Bank to hand over the property to the auction purchaser; which were frustrated by reason of the obstruction of Respondent No. 5 through his henchmen. The appeal before the DRAT, Allahabad is numbered as Appeal No. 1224 of 2022 and has been pending for the last two years without any interim order of stay of the sale effected.
Patna High Court L.P.A No.482 of 2024 dt.14-05-2024 4/4
this Court with CWJC No. 4524 of 2023 in which Annexure-P/1 order was passed. There is an observation in the said order that the proceedings appear to be collusive with the Bank; which we feel was unwarranted, especially since we do not see any appearance for the Bank in the said order. The ground of suppression hence also fall by the way-side.
(K. Vinod Chandran, CJ)
( Harish Kumar, J)
Sujit/-
| AFR/NAFR | NAFR |
|---|---|
| CAV DATE | |
| Uploading Date | 15.05.2024 |
| Transmission Date |
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the appeal should be stayed from handing over possession to the auction purchaser pending proceedings before the DRAT.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
M/S Jai Hanuman Aggrotech Private Ltd.
Canara Bank through its Authorized Officer Krishna Kumar
The State of Bihar, through its Chief Secretary
The District Magistrate, Samastipur
The Superintendent of Police, Samastipur
The Officer-In-Charge, Dalsingsarai Police Station
K. Vinod Chandran
Harish Kumar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
