A.J. MOTORS Vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners are before this Court in this petition against the action initiated on behalf of respondent No.2 under .the Securitization and Reconstruction of the Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (hereinafter referred to as the SARFAESI Act "™) to take possession of the premises. This Court while taking note of the contention put forth had through the order dated 03.08.2016 granted the benefit of being put back in possession so as to earn on with their business.

(2.) Respondent No.2-Bank claiming to be aggrieved by the said order had preferred appeals in W.A. Nos. 3289-3290/2016. The Hon'ble Division Bench through the order dated 12.01.2017 had recorded the position that the petitioners herein had removed the materials, which were lying inside the premises, as was permitted by respondent No.2 herein. If that be the position, an order for restoration of possession does not arise. However, the Hon'ble Division Bench had ordered status quo till the writ petition is disposed of.

(3.) Since the petitioners claiming to have tenancy right over the Secured Asset, are before this Court, the petitioners in any event, have an alternative remedy of appeal as provided under Section 17(4A) of the SARFAESI Act. Therefore, if the rights arising relating to tenancy is to be determined, the same is to be determined in such appeal and all contentions in that regard are left open. Since the Hon'ble Division Bench has granted status quo, the benefit of the same shall enure to the petitioners, if the petitioners desires to file an appeal before the DRT and if such appeal is filed within four weeks from the date of which the copy of this order is available, the DRT shall take into consideration the time spent by the petitioners before this Court for the purpose of computation/condonation of delay. In terms of the above, petitions stand disposed of. Registry to return the papers, if any. sought by the learned counsel for the petitioners.