Debts Recovery Tribunals and Appellate Tribunals
SERAFUL SK vs UNITED BANK OF INDIA on 26 February 2020
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.
Page No.
DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL - SILIGURI
ORDER SHEET
(Continuation)
Case No. \_\_\_\_\_
Vs
<table border="1" style="width: 100%; text-align: center;"> <tr> <td>MA/03/2020 in SA/106/17</td> </tr> </table>
<table border="1" style="width: 100%; border-collapse: collapse;"> <thead> <tr> <th style="width: 15%; text-align: center;">Date of Order</th> <th style="width: 70%; text-align: center;">Order with Signature</th> <th style="width: 15%; text-align: center;">Office action with date and dated Signature of parties when necessary</th> </tr> </thead> <tbody> <tr> <td style="text-align: center; vertical-align: top;"> <div style="border: 1px solid black; padding: 2px; display: inline-block;">Dated: 26.02.2020</div> </td> <td style="text-align: center; vertical-align: top;"> <p><b>Seraful SK</b></p> <p style="text-align: center;"><b>Vs</b></p> <p><b>United Bank of India & Anr</b></p> <p>Present:</p> <p style="padding-left: 40px;">Ms. Lipi Mahanayak, Ld. Advocate for applicant.</p> <p style="padding-left: 40px;">Ms. P. Chakraborty, Ld. Advocate alongwith Mr. K.S. Mishra, Sr. Manager(Law) for respondent bank.</p> <p>Applicant has filed the present MA/03/2020 challenging the order dated 2.1.2020 passed by District Magistrate u/s 14 of SARFAESI Act for taking physical possession of the mortgage property of the borrower.</p> <p>Ld. counsel for applicant submits that as per order passed by Ld. Tribunal dated 22.1.2020 on the submission of respondent bank that bank has already withdrawn the notice dated 3.7.2017 u/s 13(2) of SARFAESI Act issued against SA applicant due to some technical fault. On the basis of above submission Ld. Tribunal disposed off the matter with the liberty to refund of court fees. She further submits that bank has sought liberty to issue fresh notice u/s 13(2) against the applicant, which has been granted by the Tribunal.</p> <p>Ld. counsel for applicant submits that during pendency of the matter bank has approached the District magistrate for taking physical passion of the property and applicant had no information in this regard. All was happened behind the back of the applicant. District Magistrate has issued notice dated 2.1.2020 u/s 14 for taking physical passion of the secured assets of the applicant on the basis of request made by respondent bank. She further submits that the question of execution of purported order of District Magistrate, passed on the basis and in continuation of same notice u/s 13(2) dated</p> </td> <td></td> </tr> </tbody> </table>
Debts Recovery Tribunal Siliguri
Page No.
DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL - SILIGURI
ORDER SHEET
(Continuation)
Case No. \_\_\_\_\_
Vs \_\_\_\_\_
<table border="1"> <thead> <tr> <th data-bbox="141 211 208 284">Date of Order</th> <th data-bbox="211 211 728 284">Order with Signature</th> <th data-bbox="731 211 874 284">Office action with date and dated Signature of parties when necessary</th> </tr> </thead> <tbody> <tr> <td></td> <td> <p>3.7.2017 can not arise at all where the bank has itself withdrawn the 13(2) notice dated 3.7.2017.</p> <p>Ld. counsel for applicant prays to set-aside/quash the order dated 2.1.2020 passed by District Magistrate with the liberty to settle the matter with respondent bank.</p> <p>Applicant has also filed IA/55/2020 with the prayer to refund of court fees as mentioned in the order passed by Ld. Tribunal dated 22.1.2020.</p> <p>On the other hand Id. counsel for respondent bank seeks time to take instruction from the concerned branch of respondent bank.</p> <p>Heard Ld. counsel for both the parties. IA/55/2020 is allowed. Applicant is permitted to get refund the court fees as per laid down rules and procedure. Registry is directed to do needful in accordance with law.</p> <p>SARFAESI application has already been disposed off on the ground that respondent bank has withdrawn itself the notice u/s 13(2) dated 3.7.2017 due to some technical fault. In the present circumstances the order passed by District Magistrate u/s 14 of SARFAESI Act dt.2.1.2020 on the basis of said 13(2) notice dated 3.7.2017 is not sustainable.</p> <p>MA/03/2020 is also disposed off as infractuuous in view of the withdrawal of Sec. 13(2) notice by respondent bank.</p> <p>File is cosigned to Record room.</p> </td> <td></td> </tr> </tbody> </table>
(D. S. Mahra)
DRT-Siliguri Presiding Officer Debts Recovery Tribunal Siliguri