WPMB/186/2023
2023 Latest Caselaw 2037 UK

      IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
                  AT NAINITAL

         THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI VIPIN SANGHI
                                 AND
              THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE RAKESH THAPLIYAL



             WRIT PETITION (M/B) NO. 186 OF 2023


                             2ND AUGUST, 2023


Between:


Salik Alvi                                 ......             Petitioner


and


Punjab National Bank                       ......           Respondent


Counsel for the petitioner        :   Mr. Deepak Joshi, learned counsel
Counsel for the respondent        :   --



The Court made the following:

JUDGMENT: (per Hon'ble The Chief Justice Sri Vipin Sanghi)


             The petitioner has preferred the present writ

petition to assail the order dated 29.05.2023, passed by

the P.O., DRT, Dehradun, in S.A. No. 128 of 2023,

preferred by the petitioner under Section 17 of the

SARFAESI Act.


2)           By the impugned order, the DRT required the

petitioner / borrower to deposit rupees ten lacs in the
                                   2




Tribunal, so as to consider the prayer of the petitioner

which     was    to   challenge       the   auction     sale   of   the

petitioner's property - the secured asset, conducted by

the respondent bank under the SARFAESI Act.


3)          The petitioner also assails the order dated

27.06.2023, whereby the said application was dismissed

in default.     Pertinently, in relation to the second order,

the     petitioner    has     already       preferred     restoration

application, which is pending consideration.


4)          The submission of learned counsel for the

petitioner is that the petitioner's application under

Section    17    would      not   be    considered,      unless     the

petitioner makes a deposit of rupees ten lacs, as

directed vide order dated 29.05.2023.                 The petitioner

assails the imposition of the said condition by the DRT.


5)          Learned      counsel       submits   that,    since     the

petitioner has very good case on merits, he could not

have been required to make the said deposit by the DRT.

We do not find any merit in this submission. Admittedly,

the petitioner is a defaulter, and the petitioner's account

was declared NPA by the respondent bank.


6)            In these circumstances, in our view, the DRT

was justified in imposing the said condition on the
                              3




petitioner.   In any event, the petitioner has statutory

right of appeal before the DRAT and, that is another

reason, why we are not inclined to entertain the present

petition.


7)          The writ petition is, accordingly, dismissed.


8)          Interim Relief Application (IA No. 01 of 2023)

also stands disposed of.



                                        ________________
                                       VIPIN SANGHI, C.J.



                                    _________________
                                    RAKESH THAPLIYAL, J.

Dt: 2nd AUGUST, 2023 Negi