MR NARENDRA GIRDHARLAL ROCHWANI AND ORS vs ICICI BANK LIMITED on 23 January 2023

**ORDER**

1. 1. The Appellants have filed the present Chamber Appeal against the order dated 19/12/2022 passed by Ld. Registrar declining registration of the proposed SA on account of failure of the Appellants to remove the objections raised by the Registry at the time of lodging the SA.

2. 2. I have heard Ld. Counsel for the Appellants and perused the record.

3. 3. It appears that the Appellants sought to file Securitization Application being aggrieved by the measures taken by the Respondent-Bank under provisions of the SARFAESI Act vide Diary No.450/2022. However, Ld. Registrar raised objections at the time of lodging the said SA and passed impugned order dated 19/12/2022 declining registration of the SA. The objections raised by the Ld. Registrar were to the effect that "Delay Required, Also Welfare not paid Rs.40/-, VP Not proper (Correction and Gujarati Language) Page 12 Not Legible". It further appears that the matter was adjourned by the Registry for the purpose of giving opportunity to the Appellants to remove the objections to various dated, i.e., 21/03/2022, 02/04/2022, 11/04/2022, 15/06/2022, 01/07/2022, 11/07/2022, 03/08/2022, 11/08/2022, 20/08/2022, 31/08/2022, 14/09/2022, 27/09/2022, 06/10/2022, 13/10/2022, 03/11/2022, 22/11/2022 and 07/12/2022. Ld. Registrar has observed in the impugned order that in spite of giving the said opportunities, the Appellants failed to rectify the defects and hence, he declined registration of the SA.

1. 4. Ld. Counsel for the Appellants submitted that the Symbolic Possession Notice u/s 13(4) was published by the Respondent Bank on 16/12/2021 and the Appellants have filed the present Appeal on 24/02/2022. In view of the orders passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in Suo Motu Writ Petition (C) No.03 of 2020, the limitation period was extended lastly till 28/02/2022 due to widespread of Covid-19 leading to numerous deaths and adversities faced by the litigants due to lockdowns. Therefore, the Securitization Application is filed within the limitation period. He further submitted that he has also placed a fresh Vakalatnama in English and affixed Welfare Stamp of Rs.40/- thereon and has also placed a legible print of the Symbolic Possession Notice published on 16/12/2021 on record. Therefore, he requested to quash and set aside the order dated 19/12/2022 passed by Ld. Registrar and to register the SA in the interest of justice.

2. 5. On perusal of record and considering the submissions of Ld. Counsel for the Appellants, it prima facie appears that the Securitization Application has not been filed within the period of limitation from the date of Symbolic Possession Notice published on 16/12/2021. However, the Appellants rely on the period of limitation extended by the Hon'ble Supreme Court from time to time in Suo Motu Writ Petition (C) No.03 of 2020. Therefore, it would be necessary to direct the Appellants to file an appropriate application for condonation of delay. The Appellants have now complied with other objections with regard to Vakalatnama and legible copy of Symbolic Possession Notice. In these circumstances, I deem it proper to allow the present Chamber Appeal. Hence, I pass the following order:-

**ORDER**

- ➤ The present Chamber Appeal is allowed.

- ➤ The order dated 19/12/2022 passed by Ld. Registrar is hereby quashed and set aside.

- ➤ The Appellants are directed to file separate application for condonation of delay before Registry within a period of one week from today.

- ➤ The Registry is directed to restore the case to its original Diary No.450/2022 and to place the matter for hearing on the board of this Tribunal upon receipt of separate application for condonation of delay.

Pronounced in open Court on 23^rd day of January, 2023.

(Laxman Madnani) Presiding Officer DRT-II, Ahmedabad

\*pathey\*