Debts Recovery Tribunals and Appellate Tribunals
GHANSHYAM NARULA AND ORS vs BANK OF BARODA on 16 September 2026
**DEBTS RECOVERY APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI**
**Misc. Appeal No. 188/2025**
**Arising out of S.A. No. 291/2025 (DRT-I, Delhi)**
**Item No. 29**
**Ghanshyam Narula & others**
**V.**
**Bank of Baroda**
**16.09.2026 Hon'ble Dr. Justice Sudhir Kumar Jain**
Present: Sh. Manish Malik, Advocate along with Sh. Ghanshyam Narula, appellant through VC
Sh. Sumeet Anand, Advocate for Respondent This matter is taken up through Hybrid hearing.
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.
1. It is reported by the appellant that no settlement could be explored with the respondent.
2. The appellants have filed SA bearing No. 291/2025 titled as **Ghanshyam Narula & others v. Bank of Baroda**, which is stated to be pending before DRT-I, Delhi. DRT-I, Delhi, vide order dated 22.08.2025 rejected the appellants interim prayer for restraining the bank from taking over the physical possession of the subject property on 22.08.2025. It is stated that due to the protection order passed by this Tribunal, possession of the subject property is still with the appellants.
3. On perusal of the impugned order dated 22.08.2025, it appears that the appellants claimed their rights over the subject property by way of a registered sale deed dated 05.01.2010 and a registered relinquishment deed dated 30.12.2019. The respondent bank is claiming its rights on the ground of creation of a charge in respect of the subject property in the year 2005.
4. Sh. Sumeet Anand, Advocate for the respondent, argued that the protection order was granted in favour of the appellants vide order dated 03.11.2025 passed by this Tribunal, as reply had not been filed by the respondents. Sh. Sumeet Anand, Advocate for the respondent further stated that reply has been filed and accordingly prayed that the interim protection granted to the appellants be vacated.
5. It appears that the appellants are claiming ownership over the subject property by way of registered sale deed dated 05.01.2010 and registered relinquishment deed dated 30.12.2019, whereas the respondent bank is claiming its rights on the ground of creation of a charge in respect of the subject property which was created in the year 2005. Further it is stated that the respondent has all the relevant documents which were submitted by the borrower at the time of creation of the mortgage of the subject property.
6. Both parties are claiming their respective ownership in respect of the subject property on the basis of the documents available with them. Accordingly, the present appeal stands disposed of with a direction to DRT-I, Delhi to decide SA bearing No. 291/2025 on or before 31.12.2026, but not later than 31.03.2027. Till then, the parties are directed to maintain *status quo* in respect of the subject property.
7. The copy of this order be sent to DRT-I, Delhi for information and compliance.
----- **(Dr. Justice Sudhir Kumar Jain)** **Chairperson**
-P