BADRI NARAYAN TEWARI AND ANOTHER v. DEBT RECOVERY TRIBUNAL LKO. AND 3 OTHERS
A227/3681/2025 · 2025-08-12
Jaspreet Singh
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 144308 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 144308 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:47040 Court No. - 7 Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 3681 of 2025 Petitioner :- Badri Narayan Tewari And Another Respondent :- Debt Recovery Tribunal Lko. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Amarjeet Singh Rakhra,Bashisth Muni Mishra,Suneet Kumar Sharma Counsel for Respondent :- Prabhat,Charan Deep Singh Bedi,Mandeep Kumar Mishra,Praveen Dwivedi Hon'ble Jaspreet Singh,J. Heard Sri Amarjeet Singh Rakhra learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Praveen Dwivedi learned counsel for the respondent-Bank and Sri Mandeep Kumar Mishra leaned counsel for respondent nos. 3 and 4. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the petition is being
disposed of at the admission stage itself.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has filed a rejoinder affidavit to the short counter affidavit filed by the Bank and the same is taken on record. The controversy involved in the instant petition before this Court is within a very narrow compass. The record indicates that the certain securitization proceedings were initiated by the petitioner by filing an application registered as S.A. No. 939 of 2024 before the Debts Recovery Tribunal(hereinafter referred to as the DRT), Lucknow. At the given point of time, the property of the petitioner was subjected to auction and it is in the aforesaid background that the DRT by means of its order dated 2.1.2025. had passed an interim
order restraining the Bank from taking physical possession of the property in question and also granted 15 days' time to the respondent-Bank to file its response. It is the case of the petitioner that thereafter the matter was taken up before the DRT on 14.5.2025, on whcih date, the DRT passed the impugned order whereby it vacated the interim order granted on 2.1.2025 on the premise that since the interim order was granted only till the time the respondent Bank was required to file its response and as the response had been filed therefore without entering into the merits or contention of
the respective parties the interim order was vacated. Being aggrieved, the petitioner has approached this Court and the record before this Court also revels that a co-ordinate Bench of this Court on 14.7.2025 had directed for stay of the further proceeding before the DRT in pursuance of the order dated 14.5.2025 Submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the once an interim order was granted and the securitization application was ripe for hearing it was not open for the DRT to have vacated the interim order simply because the Bank had filed its response.
Learned counsel for the Bank has candidly submitted that the petition may be disposed of with the direction to the DRT to consider and decide the pending securitization application within a time frame to be fixed by this court and till then the status quo be maintained. Considering the aforesaid consensus between learned counsel for the parties, the instant petition is disposed of with a direction to the DRT, Lucknow to consider and decide the pending securitization application of the petitioner i.e. S.A. No. 939 of 2024 within a period of six weeks from the date a certified copy of the order is placed before the DRT concerned. It is also provided that the parties shall co-operate in the proceedings. It has been informed by the counsel for the respondent-Bank that the next date fixed in the DRT is 6.10.2025 and none of the parties shall seek adjournment, unless there are exceptional circumstances, nor adjournments will be granted on the asking of any party. Accordingly, liberty shall be available to the Bank to move an application for preponement of the date and in case such an application is filed the same shall be considered by the DRT and appropriate order shall be passed so that the time line provided by the Court can be adhered to. Hence, till the disposal of the S.A. No. 939 of 2024. The parties shall maintain the status quo as exist today. It is made clear that the Court has not considered the merits of the controversy which shall be considered by the DRT, Lucknow. With the aforesaid directions, the petition is disposed of.
Order Date :- 12.8.2025 kanhaiya Digitally signed by :- KANHAIYA KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench