JUDGMENT :

1. Heard Sri A.K. Goyal, learned counsel for the revisionist/ defendant and Sri Siddharth Srivastava, learned counsel for plaintiff/respondent no.1.

2. The plaintiff/respondent no.1 instituted a suit for cancellation of sale deed dated 30.03.2009 executed by defendant/respondent no.1 in favour of defendant/respondent no.3. The suit was instituted on the ground that the plaintiff/respondent no.1 is the owner of the property in dispute and sale deed has been illegally executed by the defendant/respondent no.1 in favour of defendant/respondent no.3.

3. In the suit, an application under Order 7 Rule 11 C.P.C. was filed by the revisionist/defendant no.1 contending inter-alia that the suit is barred as the sale deed has been executed under Section 13 (2) of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (hereinafter referred to as 'SECURITISATION ACT, 2002') and a case for cancellation of sale deed is registered as Case No.67 of 2008 is pending before the Debt Recovery Tribunal.

4. The trial Court by order dated 01.09.2021 rejected the said application holding that the question whether the suit is barred is mixed question o