Debts Recovery Tribunals and Appellate Tribunals
MR VIJAYARAGHAVAN RAMABHADRAN vs AXIS BANK on 15 October 2024
**Before Arun Kumar Singal, Presiding Officer DRT-III, Navi Mumbai Chamber Appeal No.23 of 2024**
Presented on : 05.10.2024
Decided on : 15.10.2024
**1. Vijayraghvan Ramabadran**
**2. Mrs. Asha Narayan,**
Both No.1 and 2 having address at Flat No.A-1, F-1/103, 1<sup>st</sup> floor, Bldg. No.30, Seawood Estate, Off. Palm Beach Marg, NRI Complex, Sector 54, 56, 58, Seawoods, Nerul, Navi Mumbai 400 025
...APPELLANTS
**V/s.**
**1. AXIS Bank Ltd.,**
Having address at Axis House, 7<sup>th</sup> Floor, C-2, Wadia International Centre, Pandurang Bhudkar Marg, Worli, Mumbai 400 025.
**2. M/s. Akshaya Supply Chain Pvt. Ltd.**
102, 1<sup>st</sup> floor, Vrajbhoomi Complex, B/h. Ship, Building, off C.G. Road, Navrangpura, Ahmedabad, Gujrat 380 009
And having registered address as per Master Data as, Office No.A/2-912, Palladium, Near Orchid Wood, Opp. Divyabhaskar, Corporate Road, Makarba, Ahmedabad, Gujrat 380 051.
...RESPONDENTS
**Argued By -**
Advocate Mr. Akshay Malviya for the Appellants.
Advocate Mrs. Uma Fadia for the Respondent No.1 Bank.
Respondent No.2 absent.
*Arun*
15.10.2024
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.
ORDER
1. 1. This Order of mine shall dispose of the Chamber Appeal bearing No.23 of 2024.
2. 2. This Tribunal has given due consideration to the arguments advanced by the counsel for both the parties.
3. 3. The Securitisation Application (L) No.842 of 2024 was filed on 29.05.2024 in this Tribunal by the Applicants through Advocate Mr. Akshay Malviya and Mr. Gopal Dalvi who further authorised Advocate Ms. Riya Pawar/Pratiksha/Pooja Acharekar to act, appear and sign for compliance and collect notice/summons/certified copy and other clerical work on their behalf in the Securitisation Application and the Applicants were given time to remove objections which they were supposed to remove within one month as permitted by the Ld. Registrar but, the defects were not rectified even thereafter and exercising power under Sub-Rule (3) of Rule 5 of the Debts Recovery Tribunal (Procedure) Rules, 1993, the Ld. Registrar declined to register the Application.
4. 4. Though the Applicants have submitted that they were not aware and two of the members in their family were suffering from Cancer, so, matter should not have been
*Ahmed* 15-10-2024
dismissed on very first date but the fact cannot be ignored that the Applicants filed Securitisation Application in the month of May 2024 and it was dismissed only in the month of September 2024 whereas, Section 17(5) of the SARFAESI Act, 2002 mandates that the Securitisation Application be disposed of within 60 days from the date of such Application but, in this case, the Applicants did not bother to remove the objections and this Chamber Appeal has been filed for restoration of the Securitisation Application when notice for possession was served upon the Applicants and then they rushed to this Tribunal for restoration of the Securitisation Application.
5. The reason that the Applicants should not suffer for the negligence of the Advocate is not the sufficient cause in the cases under the SARFAESI Act, 2002 to condone the delay and to restore the Securitisation Application. The Chamber Appeal No.23 of 2024 is devoid of merit and is hereby dismissed with no order as to costs.
(ARUN KUMAR SINGAL) PRESIDING OFFICER DRT-II, MUMBAI
Typed By - S S Khawla, PS