WPMB/280/2023
2023 Latest Caselaw 3060 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. 280 OF 2023


                         10TH OCTOBER, 2023



M/s Sona Agro Seeds & others        ......                 Petitioners


Verses


Punjab National Bank & another ......                    Respondents



Counsel for the petitioners    :   Mr. Atul Kumar Bansal, learned
                                   counsel

Counsel for the respondents    :   Mr. Shobhit Joshi, learned counsel
                                   holding brief of Mr. Ashish Joshi,
                                   learned counsel for the respondent
                                   No. 1


The Court made the following:

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


             The petitioners have preferred the present writ

petition to seek the following relief :


      "i)    Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of
             mandamus commanding the respondent No. 2
             herein to take a decision on I.A. No. 135 of
             2023 filed by the petitioners in OA No. 227 of
             2022 after hearing all the parties concern on
                                2




            I.A. No. 135 of 2023 before hearing the final
            arguments in OA No. 227 of 2022."



2)          The   case   of    the    petitioners   is   that   the

petitioners have denied certain documents relied upon

by the respondent bank in the Original Application

preferred    before   the     Debts    Recovery     Tribunal    for

recovery of the loaned amount.


3)          The petitioners, who are defending the said

Original Application, moved an application, being I.A.

No. 135 of 2023, in O.A. No. 227 of 2022, requesting

that the witness of the respondent bank be summoned

for cross-examination.        However, the said application

has not been decided by the DRT, and the DRT has fixed

the matter for final hearing of the arguments in the

Original Application.


4)          We are not inclined to entertain this petition.

It is not for this Court to interfere with the ongoing

proceedings before the DRT.           Such like interference at

the interlocutory stages would completely defeat the

purpose of the enactment of the Recovery of Debts and

Bankruptcy Act, as it impinges the progress of the

proceedings. Moreover, appellate remedy is available to
                            3




the petitioners before the Debts Recovery Appellate

Tribunal. The same has not been invoked.



5)         The writ petition is, accordingly, dismissed.


6)        Stay Application (IA No. 01 of 2023) also

stands disposed of.



                                      ________________
                                      VIPIN SANGHI, C.J.



                                  _________________
                                  RAKESH THAPLIYAL, J.

Dt: 10TH OCTOBER, 2023 Negi