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

2022 Supreme(Online)(KER) 16596

JUDGMENT

The petitioner has approached this Court being aggrieved by the fact that his Securitisation Application (Ext. P6) has not been numbered by the registry on the ground that it is bared by limitation.

2. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner states that the petitioner has filed a chamber appeal as provided for in Rule 5, sub-clause (5) of the Debt Recovery Tribunal (Procedure) Rule 1993 and the same is yet to be taken up for consideration. It is submitted that in the meanwhile an Advocate Commissioner has been appointed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Alappuzha and the notice has been issued to the petitioner proposing to take possession of the secured asset today.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that till a decision is taken on Ext. P7, the proceedings for taking physical possession may be kept in abeyance. It is also pointed out that since the Advocate Commissioner has issued notice for taking physical possession, a fresh cause of action has arisen and even if the Securitisation Application already filed is bared by limitation, the petitioner will be within time to challenge the proceedings under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act.

4. The learned counsel appearing for the respondent Bank states that the notice for taking physical possession issued by the Advocate Commissioner does not amount to a fresh cause of action. However, he has no objection to direction being issued to the Tribunal to consider and pass orders on Ext. P7. It is submitted that if the petitioner has a case that the notice issued by the Advocate Commissioner amounts to a fresh cause of action, he has also to amend the Securitisation Application.

5. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case this writ petition is disposed of directing the Debt Recovery Tribunal-II, Ernakulam to consider and pass orders on Ext.P7 application and also to consider whether the Securitisation Application will be in time with reference to the proceedings initiated under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act, provided the petitioner amends the Securitisation Application already filed. The proceedings for taking physical possession of secured asset shall stand suspended for a period of three weeks from today to enable the petitioner to seek appropriate reliefs from the Tribunal.

The Writ Petition is disposed of as above.

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 Back to top