ARADHANA SETH Vs. PRESIDING OFFICER DEBT RECOVERY TRIBUNAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONERS have filed present writ petition for quashing of order dated 16-7-2008 (annexure-5 to the writ petition)passed by Presiding Officer, Debts Recovery tribunal, Allahabad, rejecting application moved on their behalf under Section 17 (1)of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (SARFAESI Act) as being time barred.

(2.) BRIEF background of the case is that petitioners were guarantors in respect of cash credit facility which was extended to m/s. Ayush Enterprises, a proprietorship concern of one Rajesh Kumar Singh, who had agency/dealership of Tractors, Two wheelers etc. Cash Credit hypothecation of goods facility of Rs. 1,50,000/- was given to the said Enterprises to promote its business and sales service. Petitioners had mortgaged immovable properties by virtue of being guarantors. As per R. B. I, guidelines, the account of M/s. Ayush Enterprises became irregular and was declared as Non-Performing Asset, as such in consonance with the said guidelines Bank requested the borrower to regularise the said account, but no heed was paid and ultimately Bank was left with no option but to issue notice under Section 13 (2) of the SARFAESI Act. Petitioners after receipt of the said notice failed to comply with the same and entire dues along with interest was not paid. Thereafter the Bank in question issued notice for recovery of Rs. 1,61,48,377. 02 as on 30-6-2007. Said amount was not paid within 60 days as per bank and then notice was issued for taking action under Section 13 (4) of the said Act on 23-9-2007 fixing 9-10-2007 as the date for taking possession. Possession was taken on 9-10-2007. On 7-11-2007 an application was moved under Section 17 (1) of SARFAESI act before the Debts Recovery Tribunal along with an application to condone the delay. To the said application no objection was filed. Writ petition No. 31033 of 2007 was filed before this Court, wherein this Court asked the Debt Recovery Tribunal to decide the matter. Thereafter, Tribunal heard the matter and proceeded to reject the application as being barred by time. At this juncture, present writ petition has been filed.

(3.) WITH the consent of the parties, present writ petition is being heard and finally decided.