Back
NAJMI WAZIRI, SUDHIR KUMAR JAIN
Mohammad Adnan – Appellant
Versus
Reserve Bank of India – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Najmi Waziri, J. (Oral)
The hearing has been conducted through hybrid mode (physical and virtual hearing).
1. This petition seeks the setting aside of all proceedings emanating from O.A. No. 984/2016, which was disposed-off by Debt Recovery Tribunal-II (DRT-II), New Delhi by order dated 05.09.2022, holding inter alia reads as under:
"...3. On notice by this Tribunal, all the Defendants failed to cause appearance, despite publication, hence, they were all ordered to be proceeded against ex-parte, vide order dated 24.05.2017 of this Tribunal. However, on an application preferred by Defendant Nos. 1&2, the order was recalled, qua them only, vide order dated 27.08.2018 and their written statement was allowed to be taken on record. During the pendency of the present OA, on 28.11.2018, PNB Housing Finance Ltd., preferred an application Order-1 Rule-10 of CPC, for impleading it as necessary party, on the ground that the charged property has been financed by them to one Sh. Ranjan Chandra Dey and a Housing Loan of Rs.43,41,000/- has been granted by them, on 26.08.2015, against the security of the charged property, which has been mortgaged in its favour. PNBHFL came to knowledge of
The court emphasized that the petitioner would have the liberty to file a response/reply at the appropriate stage and pursue available legal remedies, and would not be required to make any payments u....
The court's decision emphasized the principle that no recovery liability can be fastened upon the petitioner until the proceedings have been exhausted, and the petitioner's right to pursue remedies w....
The rights of the second allottee and the recovery process in case of default by the developer were central to the court's decision.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that in cases of loan agreements for property development, recovery should first be sought from the property developer and land owner, with the pet....
The High Court cannot interfere with ongoing insolvency proceedings under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, emphasizing the need for petitioners to pursue remedies within that framework.
Homebuyers cannot claim possession after electing for a refund; finality of RERA order prevails in insolvency proceedings.
Final RERA refund decree crystallises homebuyer rights to refund, barring possession claims in CIRP; RP bound by decree and resolution plan exit policy without order modification.
The central legal point established in the judgment is the importance of upholding consent terms, the obligations of the parties, and preventing deliberate obstruction of recovery proceedings.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that claims based on forged documents and false representations will not be countenanced, and the court emphasized the importance of evidence to su....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
