STATE BANK OF INDIA Vs. SONI ISPAT LTD.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BOTH the appeals are heard. Appeal No. R -53/13 is preferred by the secured creditor under Section 18 of the SARFAESI Act, 2002 challenging the order passed by the DRT on 30th January, 2013 in S.A. No. 189/12, by which the Tribunal has allowed the securitisation application filed by the respondent No. 1 and by passing the order impugned the Tribunal has held that there was no proper consortium in terms to Section 13(9) of the SARFAESI Act, 2002. The Tribunal also came to a conclusion that the notice of possession was given and the notice published to auction the property were bad in law. In the present case the Tribunal has adopted unique attitude for adjudicating the case. The Tribunal at the first instance has allowed the preliminary obligation and quashed the proceedings taken up by the consortium and also quashed the notice of auction as well as notice of possession and, thereafter, the Tribunal fixed the case for final argument by and also filing of rejoinder on 15th February, 2013.

(2.) IN this regard, this is to be seen that when the Tribunal has quashed the action taken by the lead Bank i.e. appellant as well as the possession notice and the auction notice, then nothing remained to be adjudicated by the Tribunal. Yet, the Tribunal has fixed the case for final arguments by directing the appellant to file the rejoinder.

(3.) ADMITTEDLY , while initiating the proceedings the lead Bank has not taken into account the dues which were recoverable by the Bank of Baroda. The Bank of Baroda was having the dues to be recovered from the respondent No. 1 for a sum of Rs. 29.50 lacs.