Debts Recovery Tribunals and Appellate Tribunals
Satyanarayan SO Ramnarayan Maniyar vs Punjab National Bank on 23 July 2019
Presented on:
18.01.2019
Registered on:
19.01.2019
Decided on:
23.07.2019
Duration:
Y M D
0 06 05
IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL AT AURANGABAD
APPEAL NO.01/2019
1.
Mr.Satyanarayan s/o Ramnarayan
Maniyar, Age: 62 years, Occu.:
Business, Wagh Chambers, East of
Vallabhdas Walji (Golani), Market,
Navi Peth, Jalgaon, Dist. Jalgaon,
Pin-425 001.
2.
Mr.Subhash s/o Shantilal Lodha,
Age: 57 years, Occu.: Chartered
Accountant, Wagh Chambers, East
of
Vallabhdas
Walji
(Golani),
Market, Navi Peth, Jalgaon, Dist.
Jalgaon, Pin-425 001.
… Appellants
Versus
1.
Punjab National Bank, a body
corporate established & constituted
under
the
Banking
Companies
(Acquisition
and
Transfer
of
Undertakings) Act, 1970 having its
head office at Bhikaji Kama Place,
New Delhi and one of its branch at
Jalgaon.
2.
M/s. Kumandas Visnaji, 274, Navi
Peth, Jalgaon, through its Proprietor
Shri. Hiren Haridas Ved, Age: 48
years, Occ: Business, R/o. Visnaji
Nagar, Navi Peth, Jalgaon.
3.
Shri.Hansraj Kumandas Ved, Age:
66 years, Occ.: Business, R/o. 274,
Navi Peth, Jalgaon, Tq. & Dist.
Jalgaon.
… Respondents
APPEARANCES
For the Appellants
Mr.M.M.Avhad - Advocate
For Respondent no.1
Mr.Gajendra
A
Rajput
i/b
Mr.S.V.Adwant - Advocate
For Respondent nos.2 and 3
Ms.Shilpa
G
Talhar
i/b
Mr.A.G.Talhar - Advocate
Shri Deepak M Thakkar
I/c Presiding Officer
JUDGMENT PRONOUNCED ON : 23.07.2019
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.
JUDGMENT
1. The appellants are dis-satisfied and aggrieved by the order dated 22nd December, 2018 passed by the learned Recovery Officer.
2. It is the case of the appellant that on 29th July, 2016 auction was held in which he was declared as highest bidder. Pursuant thereto, on 10th February, 2017 the sale certificate was issued in his favour. Thereafter, the Certificate Holder Bank was directed to handover the possession to the appellant i.e. the auction purchaser. Respondent no.1 bank handed over symbolic possession to the appellant. Thereafter, the appellant filed application (Exhibit-110) seeking physical possession of the property purchased in the auction.
3. There was nothing wrong in the application (Exhibit-110) filed by the appellant. In my view, once the certificate was issued on 10th February, 2017 it was the duty of the Recovery Officer to handover the possession to the appellant.
4. Hence, I pass the following order.
ORDER
(A) By consent of the parties, appeal is allowed with cost made easy.
(Deepak M Thakkar) I/c Presiding Officer Debts Recovery Tribunal, Aurangabad