Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH
Devashis Baruah
CRP(IO)/110 of 2019 – Appellant
Versus
Union Of India And Ministry Of Finance (Banking Division), 1st Floor, Jeevandeep Building, Parliament Street, New Delhi- Is Rep. Its Secretary – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. introduction of the case and parties. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. challenge to order for lack of opportunity. (Para 3 , 4 , 5 , 10) |
| 3. background of the recovery certificate issued. (Para 6 , 7 , 8) |
| 4. details on respondent's actions and petitioners' deposits. (Para 11 , 12 , 14) |
| 5. legal provisions regarding recovery methods. (Para 16 , 17 , 18) |
| 6. violation of natural justice in the order. (Para 19 , 20) |
| 7. court's directive for proper procedure in future. (Para 21 , 22) |
| 8. conclusion on the revision petition. (Para 23) |
JUDGMENT :
Devashis Baruah, J.
Heard Mr A Das, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners and Mr M Sharma, the learned counsel appears on behalf of the respondent No. 3.
2. Taking into account that the present proceedings is directed against an order passed by the respondent No. 4, who passed the said in exercise of his powers under Section 28 of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 (for short, “the Act of 1993”), the name of respondent No. 4 is struck off.
3. The petitioners herein, have invoked the supervisory jurisdiction of this Court to challenge the order dated 31.01.2019, whereby the learned Recovery Officer, Debts Recovery Tribunal, ha
The court upheld that attachment orders must comply with principles of natural justice, emphasizing the necessity of granting parties the opportunity to be heard before such actions are taken.
Objections to property attachment under Section 84 of the Cr. P. C can be raised prior to attachment, and the court must address them without delay.
Recovery Officers must adhere to jurisdictional limits and cannot impose binding interim orders affecting property rights without proper evidentiary basis and due process.
A party must exhaust available statutory remedies before seeking intervention from a writ court, ensuring respect for legal processes.
Orders requiring a bank guarantee under O.38 CPC must adhere strictly to prescribed legal procedures for attachment before judgment.
The petitioner should approach the DRT if aggrieved by the order passed by the Recovery Officer under Section 30 of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993.
Attachment before judgment requires strict compliance with procedural mandates; failure to do so renders the order unsustainable.
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
