KOTAK MAHINDRA BANK LTD Vs. NAVSYNTH CHEMICALS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS Appeal under Section 20 of the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993 (hereinafter referred as "RDDBFI Act") has been directed by the appellant against the order dated 1st May, 2012 passed by Mr. K, Ghose, the learned Presiding Officer, (Learned P.O.) Debts Recovery Tribunal -I (DRT), Ahmedabad in Chamber Appeal No. 01/2012 (Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd. v. Navsynth Chemicals) whereby the learned Presiding Officer has dismissed the aforesaid Chamber Appeal filed by the appellant. The relevant facts giving rise to the present appeal may be summarized as under:

(2.) DURING pending R.P., the Certificate Holder (C.H. Bank) i.e. SBI assigned the debt of the borrower along with underlying securities in favour of Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd., the appellant. The appellant on the basis of the assignment made by SBI, stepped into the shoes of SBI and was brought on record as C.H. Bank in the R.P. The Recovery Officer vide order dated 30th July, 2008 appointed Mr. Anand Sovani, the Deputy Manager of the C.H. Bank, as Receiver for taking over possession of the said flat, but unfortunately, Mr. Anand Sovani expired on 19th August, 2008. The Recovery Officer thereafter appointed one of the ex officio of the appellant Bank as Receiver to take over the possession of the said flat. But due to non -cooperation of the society and Police authorities, the Receiver, could not take over the possession of the said flat. The Recovery Officer thereafter appointed one Mr. Digvijaysingh Zala as a Court Officer to assist the Receiver to take over the possession of the said flat. The DRT Receiver thereafter took over physical possession of the said flat on 23rd April, 2011 in presence of the Court Officer.

(3.) ALTHOUGH the Recovery Officer during the pending R.P. had fixed 20th September, 2011 as the date of auction sale of the said flat, but on that date, no bidder turned up. Consequently, the auction failed. The Authorized Officer thereafter took over the symbolic possession of the said flat on 11th January, 2012 under Section 13(4) of the SARFAESI Act. The Authorized Officer however, could not take over the physical possession of the said flat, as the same was under physical possession of the DRT Receiver. The Authorized Officer on 13th January, 2010 moved M.A. (Ext. H/59) before the Recovery Officer to raise the attachment of the said flat and to direct the DRT Receiver to hand over the possession of the said flat to him. The Recovery Officer partly allowed his application and lifted the attachment from the said flat, but did not pass any order about his prayer, seeking for direction to the Court Receiver to hand over the possession of the said flat to him. The Authorized Officer thereafter brought this fact to the notice of the Recovery Officer on 27th February, 2012, The Recovery Officer thereafter allowed the M.A. (Ext. H/59) vide order dated 27th February, 2012 in the following terms: