MAGNUM STEELS LTD. Vs. ASSET RECONSTRUCTION COMPANY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present writ petition has been filed challenging the impugned order dtd. 20/1/2024 passed by the Debts Recovery Tribunal - I, Delhi ('DRT') in T.A. No. 165/2022[ An application filed by the Petitioner under Sec. 17 of the SARFAESI Act challenging the Notice issued by the Respondent under Sec. 13(2) and 13(4) of the said Act.] allowing the said application and directing the Petitioners herein to pay to the Respondent No.1, within a period of 30 days, a sum of Rs.2,74,31,840.37 as on 26/11/2021 together with pendente lite and future interest @12.50% per annum with monthly rent from date of filing of the application till date of realization, failing which the said amount shall be recovered from the sale of mortgaged property bearing no. 312 and 313, 3rd floor, P.P. Tower, Tower B, Plot No. C1, 2 and 3, Netaji Subhash Place, Pitampura, Delhi without roof rights having super area of 2850 sq. ft. ('secured asset').

(2.) The Petitioner No.1 herein had executed a Loan Agreement dtd. 21/8/2015 with the Respondent No.2, i.e. Bajaj Finance Limited, against mortgage of the secured asset, for a sum of Rs.2,97,00,000.00. It is stated that subsequently, the said loan account along with its debt/ receivables was assigned to the Respondent No.1, i.e. Asset Reconstruction Company India Ltd.) w.e.f. 24/6/2021

(3.) Learned counsel for the Respondent No.1 has raised a preliminary objection to the maintainability of the present petition in view of the availability of statutory remedy of appeal under Sec. 20 of the RDDB Act. He states that Petitioners have approached this Court with unclean hands, inasmuch as, they have flouted the order of the CMM and interfered with possession of the secured asset by unauthorisedly breaking open the seal of the Respondent No.1 on the secured asset.