SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2021 Supreme(UK) 485

MANOJ KUMAR TIWARI
Ahuja Traders Through Proprietor Sh. Anil Kumar Ahuja – Appellant
Versus
Edelweiss Asset Reconstruction Company Limited – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
Karan Anand, Advocate, T.S. Phartiyal, Advocate

JUDGMENT

Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J. - Petitioners took a commercial loan from IndusInd Bank. Since petitioners could not repay the loan, therefore recovery proceedings were initiated against them by respondent no. 1, which is an Asset Reconstruction Company, in terms of Section 5 of Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002.

2. Petitioners are aggrieved by possession notice dated 16.11.2021 passed by District Magistrate, Haridwar under Section 14 of Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002.

3. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioners that petitioners have approached Debts Recovery Tribunal, Dehradun under Section 17 of the aforesaid Act, however, on account of vacancy on the post of Presiding Officer, the Tribunal is not functioning. He, therefore, submits that petitioners have now become remediless and if some protection is not given to them, the very purpose of filing securitization application before Debts Recovery Tribunal would be frustrated.

4. Having regard to the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, it is provided that for a period of four we

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top