ABHAY S. OKA, PANKAJ MITHAL
Pankaj Kumar Tiwari – Appellant
Versus
Indian Overseas Bank Asset Recovery Management Branch – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Abhay S. Oka, J.
Leave granted.
2. It is not necessary to serve notice to the second to eleventh respondents. Notice is accepted by the learned counsel for the first respondent.
3. By the impugned order dated 27th September, 2023, a Division of the Bombay High Court stayed an order passed by a Civil Court in Bihar by entertaining a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
4. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellant and the learned senior counsel appearing for the first respondent.
5. The present appeal discloses a shocking state of affairs. The first respondent is a nationalized bank. The second respondent was the borrower who had created an equitable mortgage in respect of the properties mentioned in paragraph 1 of the impugned order. The first respondent proceeded against five properties mentioned in paragraph 1 of the impugned order. Orders were passed in favour of first respondent under Section 14 of the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (for short "SARFAESI Act, 2002"). The
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.