ABHINASH BARUAH Vs. RAJ KUMR SHAH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The instant application has been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India against an order dtd. 18/11/2023 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Sr. Div.), Dibrugarh in Misc. (J) Case No. 279/2023 arising out of TS No. 108/2018. By the aforesaid order, the application filed by the present petitioner as defendant under Order 7 Rule 11 (d) read with Sec. 151 of the CPC for rejection of the plaint has been dismissed.

(2.) The facts which emerges from the petition and the documents annexed are that the petitioner is an auction purchaser in proceeding before the learned DRT, Guwahati. The said auction purchase was the subject matter of challenge in a writ petition filed by the predecessors-in-interest of the respondent nos. 1 and 2 in this Court which was registered as WP(C) No. 6015/2014. Though vide an initial order dtd. 24/11/2014, there was an interim stay, vide the final order dt. 21/5/2018, the writ petition was disposed of directing the said respondent to approach the DRT under Sec. 17 of the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (SARFAESI) with a specific time period. It however transpires that the approach to the DRT was not done within the time prescribed and accordingly when the application was filed beyond such time, the same was rejected. The said respondent had thereafter filed IA(C) No. 3157/2018 before this Court praying for extension of time. The Hon'ble Division Bench however, vide order dtd. 3/9/2018 had dismissed the application in which the conduct of the said respondent was also deprecated and the issue of lack of bona fide was also discussed. Thereafter, the present respondent no. 1 had filed the above civil suit on 12/10/2018. In the said suit registered as TS No. 108/2018, the present petitioner, as defendant had filed the petition under Order 7 Rule 11 (d) read with Sec. 151 of the CPC which was registered as Misc. (J) Case No. 279/2023. In the said petition, a specific plea of bar of civil suit under Sec. 34 of the SARFAESI, Act was taken. However, vide the impugned order dtd. 18/11/2023, the aforesaid application has been rejected. It is the legality and validity of the said order which has been questioned in the present proceeding.

(3.) I have heard Shri B. Dutta, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Shri S. Deka, learned counsel for the petitioner. I have also heard Shri K. R. Patgiri, learned counsel for the respondent nos. 1(a), 1 (b), 1(c) and 2 where as the respondent no. 3, Central Bank of India is represented by Shri M. Sarmah, learned counsel.