SHIHAB E M vs THE REGISTRAR, DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL –I

Headnote Court Copy Facts Arguments Court observation Judicial Analysis Case Map Category Hierarchy Table of Content

2026 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 25776

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
P. V. BALAKRISHNAN, J
SHIHAB E M – Appellant
Versus
THE REGISTRAR, DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL –I – Respondent
OP (DRT) NO. 101 OF 2026|IA 1008/2026|SA NO.809 OF 2025

Important Points

High Court refrains from intervention once Debts Recovery Tribunal resumes functioning for stay petitions.

Subject

Civil - Debt Recovery

Act Referred

Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002

Headnote

The petitioner sought directions under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002, for the Debts Recovery Tribunal to consider a stay petition (Exhibit P3) in S.A. No. 809 of 2025 and restrain proceedings based on a notice (Exhibit P2). Essential facts include absence of regular sittings at the Tribunal preventing statutory remedy, now resolved as the Tribunal has resumed functioning with the stay petition posted for 07.04.2026. The court found no further cause for intervention as the Tribunal is operational. The primary issue was whether High Court intervention was warranted due to Tribunal's non-functioning. The court's reasoning held that with the Tribunal now active and the stay petition scheduled, the petition lacked merit, emphasizing pursuit of statutory remedies. The original petition is dismissed, granting liberty to pursue remedy before the Debts Recovery Tribunal.

Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SHRI.AJITH M. JIJI
For the Respondents: SHRI.C.H.ABDUL RASAC

Table of Content
1. petition seeks directions for stay consideration due to tribunal absence. (Para 1 , 3)
2. parties heard on petition reliefs. (Para 2)
3. petition dismissed as tribunal now functional. (Para 4)

JUDGMENT

Dated this the 01^st day of April, 2026 This OP (DRT) is filed by the petitioner seeking the following reliefs:

i) Issue a direction to the Debts Recovery Tribunal-I, Ernakulam, to take up and pass appropriate orders on Exhibit P3 stay petition in S.A. No. 809 of 2026 at the earliest.

ii) Issue an order restraining the Respondent from proceeding further on the basis of Exhibit P2 notice till the disposal of Exhibit P3 stay petition by the Tribunal.”

2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for the 2^nd respondent.

3. This OP (DRT) is filed by the petitioner seeking the afore reliefs, only because of absence of regular sitting in the Debts Recovery Tribunal at the relevant time and since, the petitioner could not avail his statutory remedy. Admittedly, the Debts Recovery Tribunal has now started functioning and according to the learned counsel for the petitioner, Ext.P3 stay petition (Diary No.1007 of 2026-unnumbered I.A. of 2026 in S.A.No.809 of 2025) is now posted for consideration on 07.04.2026 before the Debts Recovery Tribunal.

4. In such circumstances, I am of the view that nothing further survives for consideration in this original petition.

Ergo, this original petition is dismissed, with liberty to the petitioner to pursue his remedy in the Debts Recovery Tribunal.