Vital Castings Ltd And Anr. vs The Oriental Bank Of Commerce And ...
2015 Latest Caselaw 5920 Del

$~14.
*    IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+    CS(OS) 2070/2014 and I.As. No. 12825, 25616 & 23170/2014
     M/S VITAL CASTINGS LTD & ANR.                  ..... Plaintiffs
                    Through: Mr. Rajeev Ranjan Pandey
                    Advocate with Mr.Sharadendra Sharma,
                    Director of the plaintiff No.1 in person
                    versus
     THE ORIENTAL BANK OF COMMERCE & ANR.           ..... Defendants
                    Through: Mr.Balvinder Ralhan, Advocate for
                    D-1/OBC with Mr.Rajesh Gulati, ARM(Law0 in
                    person
                    Mr.S.L.Gupta and Mr.P.Gowtham, Advocates
                    for SBI

      CORAM:
      HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI

                          ORDER

% 13.08.2015

1. This order is being passed in continuation of the order dated

30.7.2015, on which date, learned counsel for the defendant

No.1/Bank had pressed for rejection of the plaint on the ground that

the dispute raised in the present suit cannot be entertained by the civil

courts in view of the provisions of Section 34 of the Securitisation and

Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security

Interest Act, 2002 and further, on the ground that this court is not

vested with the territorial jurisdiction to try and entertain the suit.

2. Learned counsel for the plaintiffs states on instructions from his

clients that he may be permitted to withdraw the present suit, while

reserving the right of the plaintiffs to seek their remedies against the

defendant/Bank before the DRT, Chandigarh. He further states that

contemporaneously, his clients are proposing to approach the Bank

with an offer of a one time settlement. If the plaintiff makes a

representation to the defendant No.1/Bank for opting for a one time

settlement, the same shall be duly considered as per the applicable

Rules and a decision conveyed to the plaintiffs within one week from

the date of receipt of such a representation.

3. Learned counsel for the plaintiffs states that defendant/Bank

may be directed to stay its hands with regard to the auction of the

immoveable property, for a period of two weeks from today.

4. Learned counsel for the defendant/Bank states on instructions

from his client that the Bank is willing to accede to the said request.

5. In view of the aforesaid submission, the suit is disposed of,

along with the pending applications, while granting liberty to the

plaintiff as prayed for. The defendant/Bank shall not take further

steps to auction the immoveable property for a period of two weeks

from today.

HIMA KOHLI, J AUGUST 13, 2015 mk