SABBAM HARI Vs. THE AUTHORISED OFFICER AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Despite service, none appears for the borrower. The bank and the petitioner are represented. Affidavit of service filed in court today be taken on record.

(2.) The present challenge has been taken out by an auction purchaser, who deposited the bid amount in terms of a sale notice issued in connection with a proceeding under section 17 of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002.

(3.) Upon deposit of the said amount, pursuant to a subsequent challenge, the sale was set aside by the Debts Recovery Tribunal (DRT) at Hyderabad. A challenge was taken out by the bank against the said order before the Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal (DRAT) at Kolkata, which was functioning as the appellate tribunal over the DRT at Hyderabad at the relevant juncture. During pendency of such appeal, the present petitioner took out an application before the appellate forum for refund of the amount deposited by him, in view of the sale having been set aside by the tribunal. By the impugned order, the appellate tribunal postponed the hearing of such application along with all other proceedings in connection with the appeal, in view of a moratorium in terms of an order passed by the National Company Law Tribunal at Hyderabad Bench at Hyderabad dated July 19, 2017.