Shekhar Kabra vs Akme Fintrade (India) Ltd
2022 Latest Caselaw 4255 Raj

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 3633/2022

1. Shekhar Kabra S/o Shri Navin Kabra, Aged About 49 Years, Resident Of 292, Rajeshwar Basti, Kushalbag Palace, Banswara (Rajasthan) 327001.

2. Navin Chandra Kabra S/o Shri Ganesh Lal Kabra, Aged About 74 Years, Resident Of 292, Rajeshwar Basti, Kushalbag Palace, Banswara (Rajasthan) 327001.

3. Smt. Parvati Devi Kabra W/o Shri Navin Kabra, Aged About 72 Years, Resident Of 292, Rajeshwar Basti, Kushalbag Palace, Banswara (Rajasthan) 327001.

----Petitioners Versus

Akme Fintrade (India) Ltd., 4-5, Subcity Centre, Savina Circle, Opposite Krishi Upaz Mandi, Udaipur (Rajasthan) 313001 And/or Email [email protected], Through Its Authorised Officer.

----Respondent

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ram Naresh Vijay

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAY BISHNOI

Judgment / Order

16/03/2022

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that

against the order dated 22.2.2022 passed by the Debts

Recovery Tribunal, Jaipur (for short 'the DRT'), the

petitioners are having alternate remedy of filing appeal

(2 of 3) [CW-3633/2022]

under Section 18 of the Securitisation and Reconstruction

of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest

Act, 2002 (for short 'the Act of 2002') before the Debts

Recovery Appellate Tribunal, Delhi (for short 'the DRAT'),

but since the same is non functional as the post of the

Chairperson is lying vacant, therefore, the petitioners are

left with no option but to approach this Court by way of

filing writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of

India.

In view of the fact that the DRAT is non functional, I

deem it appropriate to hear this writ petition on merits.

Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted

that the DRT vide its order dated 22.2.2022 has illegally

rejected the appeal filed by the petitioners without taking

into consideration the grounds taken by them regarding

the illegality committed by the respondent in respect of

the mandatory provisions of the Act of 2002 and the

Rules thereunder. It is further submitted that the

petitioners, in their written arguments, has placed

reliance on the judgments of the Gujarat High Court,

however, the DRT has not even mentioned about those

judgments much less to consider the same. It is also

submitted that on earlier occasions, the DRT while relying

upon the judgments of the Gujarat High Court has set

(3 of 3) [CW-3633/2022]

aside the proceedings against the defaulters, but in this

case, the DRT has illegally not considered the judgments

passed by the Gujarat High Court.

Issue notice. Issue notice of stay petition as well,

returnable on 13.4.2022.

In the meantime, the auction in pursuance to notice

dated 11.2.2022 (Annex.11) may be carried out, but the

auction shall not be finalized without permission of this

Court.

(VIJAY BISHNOI),J

22-msrathore/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)