PIONEER GLOBEX PRIVATE LIMITED Vs. AUTHORISED OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr.I. H. Syed, learned counsel appearing for Mr.D. G. Nimavat, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr.Bhaskar Sharma, learned counsel appearing on caveat for respondents at length.

(2.) It is the contention of Mr.Syed, learned counsel for the petitioners that the petitioners have paid almost 80% of the debt and remaining 20% is to be paid. While inviting the attention of the Court to the order sheet of the Debut Recovery Tribunal - II, Ahmedabad (hereinafter be referred to as "the DRT") dated 27.12.2018, it has been contended that the DRT has observed that:

(3.) Per contra, Mr.Bhaskar Sharma, learned advocate appearing on caveat for respondent has vehemently opposed the prayer sought by the petitioners for grant of interim relief on the ground that the present petition is frivolous and earlier, the petitioners have filed two Special Civil Applications which have been withdrawn after getting interim relief for one year and the matter is being pending before the DRT, which is scheduled to be heard on 01.01.2019. According to him, the petitioners can very well make necessary submission before the DRT for stay of the impugned action of the Executive Magistrate as per Section 18 of the SARFAESI Act. According to him, there is alternative efficacious remedy available to the petitioners and, therefore, no interim order is required to be granted in favour of the petitioners, but they are habitual in filing such petitions. According to him, more than Rs.7.00 Crore is liable to be paid by the petitioners to the Bank. While relying upon the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of United Bank of India Vs. Satyawati Tondon and others, reported in AIR 2010 SC 3413, especially paras-21 and 27, he has submitted that the petition itself is not maintainable.