Dismissed

Ajay Julka v. Recovery Officer, Drt-Ii, Chandigarh and Ors.

Punjab & Haryana HC6 Sept 2012CWP/17427/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner sought to quash a sale proclamation and recovery officer's order via writ petition. The court held that the statutory remedy under Section 30 of the RDBFI Act, 1993 was available and not exhausted, thereby dismissing the petition.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition was dismissed with liberty to the petitioner to file a statutory appeal to the Tribunal.

Ajay Julka Vs Recovery Officer, Drt-Ii… — Banking and Recovery | Punjab & Haryana HC (2012)

¶1

CWP No. 17427 of 2012

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

CWP No. 17427 of 2012 Date of Decision:- September 06, 2012

¶5

Ajay Julka

¶6

..............PETITIONER(S)

¶7

vs.

¶8

Recovery Officer, DRT-II, Chandigarh and others

¶9

...........RESPONDENT(S)

¶10

CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S. SANDHAWALIA

¶11

Present:Mr. Atul Lakhanpal, Sr. Advocate, with R.S. Chahal, Advocate, for the petitioner.

¶12

AJAY KUMAR MITTAL, J. (ORAL)

¶13

The petitioner, in this petition filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, is seeking a writ in the nature of certiorari quashing proclamation of the sale dated 25.07.2012 (Annexure P-3) and order dated 31.08.2012 (Annexure P-4) whereby, respondent no. 1 has dismissed the objections filed by the petitioner.

¶14

Admittedly, under Section 30 of The Recovery of Debts due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993 (hereinafter referred to as 'The Act'), the appeal lies to Appellate Tribunal against the order of the Recovery Officer. Section 30 of the Act reads as under:-

¶15

[ 30. Appeal against the order of Recovery Officer.- (1)

¶16

Notwithstanding anything contained in section 29, any person aggrieved by an order of the Recovery Officer made under this Act may, within thirty days from the date on which a copy of the order is issued to him, prefer an appeal to the Tribunal.

¶17

CWP No. 17427 of 2012

¶18

¶19

(2) On receipt of an appeal under sub-section (1), the Tribunal may, after giving an opportunity to the appellant to be heard, and after making such inquiry as it deems fit, confirm, modify or set aside the order made by the Recovery Officer in exercise of his powers under sections 25 to 28 (both inclusive).]”

¶20

In view of the above and the factual matrix involved, we refrain from entertaining this petition without first exhausting the statutory remedy. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed with liberty to the petitioner to seek statutory remedy available to him in accordance with law.

¶21

(Ajay Kumar Mittal) Judge 06.09.2012 (G.S. Sandhawalia) shivani Judge

Ajay Julka v. Recovery Officer, Drt-Ii, Chandigarh and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ajay Julka v. Recovery Officer, Drt-Ii, Chandigarh and Ors.

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

M/S Amba Industries & Anr. Vs State Bank of Patiala & Anr.

Balwant Kaur Vs Hdfc Bank Pakhowal Road Ludhiana

Ravi Parkash Cholia Vs Union of India and Ors.

M/S Bedi Transport Co. Vs Managing Dirctor Central Ware and Anr.

Sushma Rani Vs State of Haryana and Ors.

Dhariwal Oil Carrier Vs Union of India and Ors.