VENNA TEXTILES LTD. Vs. IFCI LTD.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Challenge in this writ petition, is to an order, dated 12.07.2017, by which, the Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal, Chennai, dismissing A.I.R. No. 455 of 2016, for want of appearance and compliance of the defects noticed by the Registry.

(2.) Short facts leading to the appeal are that an Original Application has been filed by Industrial Investment Bank of India Limited (hereinafter referred to as "IIBI") for recovery of Rs. 1,99,77,619/- from the petitioners, on the ground that debt was assigned to the 1st respondent-IFCI Ltd., by deed of assignment, dated 26.05.2011. The said deed was challenged by the petitioners in S.A. No. 114 of 2012, on the file of DRT-I, Chennai. Arguments were concluded on 29.09.2012. Exactly one week after reserving the case for orders, a second deed of assignment, referring to earlier deed of assignment, was executed by IIBI in favour of the 1st respondent herein, and that the same was registered. Therefore, the petitioners have filed W.P. No. 8761 of 2014, challenging the deed of assignment, dated 26.05.2011 and this Court, vide order, dated 01.08.2014, held that deed of assignment, dated 26.05.2011, as invalid, on the ground that the assignment deed is not a registered document. Since there was another assignment deed executed on 04.10.2012, this Court observed as follows:

(3.) Thereafter, the 1st respondent issued a notice under Section 13(4) of SARFAESI Act, on 11.11.2014 and the said notice was challenged in S.A. No. 358 of 2014, before DRT, Madurai, on the ground that assignment deed, dated 04.10.2012, based on which, the 1st respondent claims right, is invalid and not in accordance with law. After hearing the petitioners, the DRT, Madurai, has granted a conditional order of stay, in respect of possession notice issued under Section 13(4) of SARFAESI Act and directed the petitioners therein to deposit Rs. 45,00,000/-, with the 1st respondent. The said order has been complied with. However, according to the petitioners, the issue, as to whether, the 1st respondent has rightfully stepped into the shoes of IIBI, remains an issue to be decided in S.A. No. 358 of 2014, on the file of Debt Recovery Tribunal, Madurai.