Kanchan Das Dashariya vs Bandhan Bank Ltd
2022 Latest Caselaw 297 Chatt

                       HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

                                            Order Sheet

                                 Writ Petition (C) No. 281 of 2022

                       Kanchan Das Dashariya Versus Bandhan Bank Ltd.




18.01.2022         Mr. A. N. Pandey, counsel for petitioner.

                   Mr. P. Acharya, P.L. for State/respondent no.2.

Let notice be issued to respondent no.1, on payment of PF as per rules, by ordinary as well as registered post.

Learned counsel for petitioner submits that he is assailing the order dated 27.09.2021 Annexure P-1 passed by the District Magistrate, Durg. It is the contention of the petitioner that he has filed the writ petition as the DRT, Jabalpur which otherwise has the jurisdiction to take up matters pertaining to the SARFAESI Act is not functional on account of no regular Presiding Officer being appointed for quite sometime. He submits that the writ petition has been filed taking into consideration the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of State Bar Council of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Union of India wherein vide order dated 16.12.2021 the Hon'ble Supreme Court has permitted the High Courts to entertain the matters which otherwise were to be dealt by DRTs and DRATs.

Learned counsel for petitioner submits that as on date the outstanding amount payable by the petitioner to the respondent no.1 is approximately Rs.16,00,000/-. It is the contention of petitioner that on account of the effect of Covid-19 there was a default on the part of petitioner in making repayment. However, given certain time the petitioner would be able to clear the entire dues payable to the respondent Bank. He further submits that the proceeding drawn under the SARFAESI Act also is in violation of the requirement under the SARFAESI Act.

Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case, more particularly taking into consideration the fact that the DRT, Jabalpur is not functional for want of a regular Presiding Officer, the present writ petition is taken up for hearing and on the question of grant of interim protection, subject to the petitioner making a payment of Rs.8,00,000/- to the respondent no.1 Bank within a period of 45 days from today, the respondent no.1 is restrained from initiating further proceedings against the petitioner till the next date of hearing. In case the petitioner fails in depositing rupees 8 lakhs within 45 days, the interim protection granted by this Court would automatically lose its efficacy.

List this case immediately after the reply of respondents is filed.

Sd/-

(P. Sam Koshy) JUDGE

Khatai