M/S Gurusukh Vintrade Services ... vs Bank Of Baroda
2022 Latest Caselaw 366 MP

                                                                                 1                               WP-29178-2021
                                                      The High Court Of Madhya Pradesh
                                                               WP No. 29178 of 2021
                                                    (M/S GURUSUKH VINTRADE SERVICES PVT. LTD. AND OTHERS Vs BANK OF BARODA)

                                              Jabalpur, Dated : 07-01-2022
                                                    Shri Satish Agrawal, learned counsel for the petitioners.

                                                    Shri Shubham Khampariya, learned counsel for the respondent.

Heard.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that aggrieved by the action of the respondents for taking possession of the property in question, the petitioners have already filed a securitization application before the Debts

Recovery Tribunal, Jabalpur, which is pregnant with an interim prayer. However, the Tribunal at Jabalpur, at present, is not functional. Thus, till the interim prayer is considered and decided by the Tribunal, the petitioners may be protected.

The said prayer is opposed by Shri Shubham Khampariya, counsel for the respondent.

During the course of hearing, learned counsel for the petitioners have placed reliance on the order dated 11.11.2021 passed by the Division Bench of Indore in W.P. No.24525/2021 [Smt. Shankuntala Mohta vs. Union

Bank of India (Erstwhile Corporation Bank) and Others].

The prayer made by the counsel for the petitioners is reasonable. Undisputedly, the Tribunal is not functional in Madhya Pradesh. A litigant cannot not be left remediless. As per the Constitutional Bench judgment of the Supreme Court in L.Chandrakumar vs. Union of India AIR 1997 SC 1125, the Court of first instance to decide the claim case is Tribunal. Thus, it is for the Tribunal to act as a Court of first instance and decide the matter on merits and at this stage, we are not inclined to interfere into the merits of the case.

In view of the order passed in Smt. Shankuntala Mohta (supra), we deem it proper to dispose of this petition with the following directions :- Signature Not Verified SAN (1) The petitioner shall submit a copy of this order Digitally signed by priyanka pithawe mishra Date: 2022.01.10 15:55:41 IST 2 WP-29178-2021 before the Registry of the Tribunal within seven working days from today.

(2) In turn, soon the Tribunal becomes functional shall take up the securitization application filed by the petitioners and consider and decide the prayer for interim relief in accordance with law expeditiously. (3) Till decision is taken up by the Tribunal on interim relief, no coercive action be taken against the petitioners by the respondents.

With the aforesaid direction, the petition is disposed of without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case.

C.c. as per rules.

                                                 (SUJOY PAUL)                                     (ARUN KUMAR SHARMA)
                                                    JUDGE                                                 JUDGE

                                              Priya.P




Signature Not Verified
  SAN

Digitally signed by priyanka pithawe mishra Date: 2022.01.10 15:55:41 IST