Telangana High Court
WP/27175/2009 of M/s. Sanjay Re-rolling Mills Pvt. Ltd., Nacharam, Vs Canara Bank, R.P.Road Branch, on 31 December 2009
SRI JUSTICE A.GOPAL REDDY and THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NOUSHAD ALI DATED: 31-12-2009 WRIT PETITION No. 27175 OF 2009 Between: M/s. Sanjay Re-rolling Mills Pvt. Ltd., Nacharam, rep., by its Managing Director, Ashok Kumar Agarwal, s/o. Late Prahaladrai, aged about 50 years, r/o. Plot No. 27/ A ,
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE A.GOPAL REDDYand THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NOUSHAD ALI
DATED: 31-12-2009
WRIT PETITION No. 27175 OF 2009
Between:
M/s. Sanjay Re-rolling Mills Pvt. Ltd., Nacharam, rep., by itsManaging Director, Ashok Kumar Agarwal, s/o. Late Prahaladrai, agedabout 50 years, r/o. Plot No. 27/A, H.No. 1-98/9/27/A, Madhapur,Jaihind enclave, Cyberabad
..... PETITIONER
AND
Canara Bank, R.P Road Branch, rep., by its Authorised Officer, ARMBranch, Hyderabad
.....RESPONDENT
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE A.GOPAL REDDYandTHE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NOUSHAD ALI
WRIT PETITION No. 27175 OF 2009
ORDER:(per Sri A. Gopal Reddy, J)
This writ petition is filed challenging the docket order dated 23-10-2009 passed by the Debts Recovery Tribunal, Hyderabad in S.ANo. 72 of 2009, whereby interim stay granted in favour of the petitionerwas extended on condition of depositing a further sum ofRs.10,00,000/-, apart from the amount of Rs.10,00,000/- depositedpursuant to the interim order passed earlier. The Tribunal adjournedthe matter to 08-12-2009 calling upon the petitioner to adduceevidence by the said date to dispose of the appeal.
The learned counsel for the petitioner contends that theTribunal having satisfied with the prima facie case and balance ofconvenience in favour of the petitioner granted stay of auction noticedated 14-02-2009, on 02-03-2009 in I.A No. 283 of 2009, with respectto the petition schedule property on condition of the petitionerdepositing Rs.10,00,000/- and modifying the said order by theimpugned docket order amounts to reviewing the earlier order andsince the Tribunal is not conferred with such jurisdiction, the same isliable to be set aside.
We see no force in the said contention advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner. The Tribunal granted ex parte interim orderon 02-03-2009 staying the auction on condition of the petitionerdepositing a sum of Rs.10,00,000/-, out of which Rs.3,00,000/- shall bepayable on or before 28-03-2009 and the balance of Rs.7,00,000/-shall be payable on or before 29-05-2009. On the respondent – Bankfiling counter seeking vacation of the said order, the Tribunal by theimpugned docket order modified the earlier order passed by it. Noillegality or infirmity is discernible with the discretion exercised by theTribunal warranting interference of this Court. Further, it is notdisputed that the liability of the petitioner is more than Rs.1,00,00,000/- . Therefore, taking the same into consideration, only one-fifth of thedebt was directed to be deposited for granting interim stay of theauction, pending the appeal, which, in our view, is reasonable.
In view of the same, we do not see any merit in the writ petition. It is accordingly dismissed. However, time for deposit is extended till15-02-2009, subject to the condition that the petitioner proceeds withthe appeal on the next date of hearing, which is said to be posted on29-01-2010 and cooperates with the Tribunal for early disposal of thesame. The respondent – Bank is entitled to withdraw the amountalready deposited and also the amount to be deposited by thepetitioner.
A. GOPAL REDDY, J
NOUSHAD ALI, J