BRIHATAKUCHAMBAL Vs. PRESIDING OFFICER DEBT RECOVERY TRIBUNAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner has filed this writ petition praying for issuance of a writ of certiorarified mandamus calling for the records of the first respondent in S.A.No.133 of 2009 dated 29.05.2009 and to quash the same and also for a direction to afford a reasonable opportunity to advance arguments in accordance with law.

(2.) THE learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has filed an application to condone the delay of 120 days in filing an appeal before the first respondent/Tribunal as per Section 17 of the SARFAESI Act and sought relief to set aside the proceedings initiated under the said Act and that the office of the first respondent/ Tribunal, by mistake has numbered the appeal as S.A.No.263 of 2007, without considering the delay in filing the appeal and after noticing the mistake, immediately withdrew the assigned number and has given Diary No.1529 of 2007 and the second and third respondents have taken notice of the application to condone the delay in projecting the appeal and also in the stay application and the first respondent/Tribunal has passed an interim order on 03.12.2007 granting status quo and as such, the property has been brought for sale in public auction and it is ascertained that the application for condonation of delay has been allowed by the first respondent/ Tribunal on 22.05.2009 and the appeal itself has been disposed of on 29.05.2009 without providing opportunity to the petitioner to put forward her case and in short, the first respondent/Tribunal has failed to issue any notice to the petitioner after allowing the delay condonation application and also failed to provide opportunity to the petitioner to file the documents for effective adjudication of the controversies/disputes raised in the appeal and therefore, the order passed by the first respondent/Tribunal in S.A.No.133 of 2009 dated 29.05.2009 is to be set aside to prevent an aberration of justice and consequently, to allow the writ petition.

(3.) THE writ petitioner, before the first respondent in S.A.SR.No.1529 of 2007 (filed under Section 17 of the SARFAESI Act, 2002) has prayed for passing of the following interim order:"Pending final decision of this application, the applicant seeks issue of the interim orders to stay the operation of the impugned notice dated 13.4.2007 issued by the respondents under Section 13(4) of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002.".