฀

฀N THE DEBTS RECOVERY APPELLATE TR฀BUNAL AT KOLKATA Misc. Appl. No. 70 of 2025 (Arising out of S.A. No 456 of 2025 – DRT-3 Kolkata)

฀HE HON’BLE JUS฀ICE SHRI ANIL KUMAR SRIVAS฀AVA, CHAIRPERSON Order No.

24.02.2026

1. THE AUTHOR฀SED OFF฀CER L & T F฀NANCE L฀M฀TED Having Registered Office At TECHNOPOL฀S 7TH FLOOR PLOT NO 4, BLOCK BP, SECTOR V, SALT LAKE, KOLKATA 700091 ... Appellant --Vs--

1. M/S SAN฀ WORLD , Having Office At 400/B/2F NETAJ฀ SUBHAS CHANDRA BOSE ROAD, KOLKATA 700047, WEST BENGAL

2.SMT DEBOL฀NA ROY Residing At 4/2 ANUKR฀T฀, BA฀SHNABGHATA BYE LANE ,NAKTALA, KOLKATA 700046 WEST BENGAL

3.SR฀ SEKHAR ROY Residing At 4/2 ANUKR฀T฀ BA฀SHNABGHATA BYE LANE, NAKTALA, KOLKATA 700047, WEST BENGAL ... Respondents For Appellant : Mr. Pankaj Kr. Mukherjee , ld. adv.

Mr. Sayak Ranjan Ganguly, ld. Adv.

Mr. Chaitali Acharya, ld. Adv.

For Respondent : Mr. Debasish Chakraborty, ld. Adv. virtually Mr. Kalachand Das, ld. Adv.

฀HE APPELLA฀E ฀RIBUNAL :

฀nstant Misc. appeal is preferred against the order dated

20.06.2025 passed by learned DRT-3 Kolkata in ฀.A. 2554 of 2025 arising out of S.A. 456 of 2025 (M/s. Sani World & Ors. Vs. L & T Finance Ltd.) whereby learned DRT disposed of the ฀.A. 2554 of 2025 and restrain the respondent financial institution from taking any step to implement the order dated 17.05.2025 passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Alipore.

2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the records.

3. As per pleadings of the parties securitization application u/s 17 of the SARFAES฀ Act, 2002 (hereinafter referred to as Act) was filed challenging the notice issued u/s 13(2) of the Act dated 18.10.2022, possession notice u/s 13(4) issued on 05.01.2023. ฀t is not in dispute that respondents are borrower of the appellant financial institution who had provided loan facility to the respondents. Loan account became irregular which was classified as NPA. Thereafter, notices were issued under securitization Act. Subsequently, an order u/s 14 of the Act was also passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Alipore on the application of the appellant financial institution on 17.05.2025, which is under challenge in the appeal.

4. Learned DRT after hearing of the learned counsel for the parties recorded finding that loan account was classified as NPA on 04.03.2021 during the period of interim order passed by Hon’ble Supreme Court in Gajendra Sharma Vs. Union of India & Anr. (2020 SCC OnLine SC 1240). ฀t is also recorded that whether loan account was rightly classified as NPA on 04.03.2021 or not is to be considered at the time of final hearing of S.A. Accordingly, learned DRT after giving opportunity of filing opposition to the securitization applicant passed an interim order restraining the appellant bank to enforce the order of the Chief Judicial Magistrate dated 17.05.2025.

5. Learned counsel for appellant would submit that the impugned order is erroneous. ฀t is submitted that in the notice u/s 13(2) issued on 18.10.2022 it is recorded in Para 7 that “defaults were committed by the borrower and the accounts were not regularized as a result thereof account was under bucket on 04.03.2021, subsequent to vacation of stay by the Hon’ble Supreme Court on NPA classification, your loan account has been classified as NPA in our books of accounts”. Accordingly, loan account was not classified as NPA on 04.03.2021 rather it was classified subsequently. Learned counsel further submits that the order passed by Hon’ble Supreme Court in Gajendra Sharma (supra) was subsequently merged in the judgment in Small Scale Industrial Manufactures Association Vs. Union of India & Ors. [(2021) 8 SCC 511] decided on 23.03.2021. Accordingly, in view of the law laid down in State of UP & Ors. Vs. Prem Chopra [(2024) 12 SCC 426) the interim order shall merge in the final order, meaning thereby interim order comes to an end with the dismissal of the proceeding. Learned counsel further placed reliance upon the judgement of Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in WP