Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 66314 (ALL)

SMT. KUSUM SINGH v. THE DEBTS RECOVERY APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AND 7 OTHERS

WRIC/19045/2025 · 2025-08-18

Manish Kumar Nigam

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:142100 Court No. - 9 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 19045 of 2025 Petitioner :- Smt. Kusum Singh Respondent :- The Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal And 7 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Bharat Kant,Shrey Singh Counsel for Respondent :- Ashok Pandey,C.S.C.,Gyan Prakash Shrivastava,Srestha Pandey Hon'ble Manish Kumar Nigam,J. 1. Rejoinder affidavit filed today is taken on record. 2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 3. This writ petition has been filed challenging the order dated 5.5.2025 passed by the D.R.A.T., Allahabad restoring the Misc. Appeal No.65/2025. 4. Petitioner, who is an auction purchaser, has challenged this order and inter alia contended that by order dated 20.9.2023 passed by D.R.T., Allahabad in S.A. No.305/2023, an application for interim relief filed by the borrower applicants to restrain the respondent - Bank from auctioning the property in e-auction to be held on 21.9.2023 was rejected. It has been further contended that e-auction took place on 21.9.2023 in which petitioner was the highest bidder and the bid of the petitioner has been accepted. On 29.9.2023, an appeal was filed by the borrower against the order dated 20.9.2023 passed by the Debt Recovery Tribunal, Allahabad and the earlier order dated 1.6.2023 which was registered as Misc. Appeal No.65/2025. In the aforesaid appeal, by order dated 12.10.2023, parties were directed to maintain status quo till 2.1.2024. It has been further contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that on 25.9.2024, petitioner moved an application for impleadment in Misc. Appeal No.65/2025 which is still pending. It has been further contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that borrowers - respondents have knowledge of the auction sale which has taken place in favour of the petitioner. The said Misc. Appeal was dismissed in default on 16.4.2025. Thereafter, restoration application for recalling the order dated 16.4.2025 was filed by the borrowers - respondents. It has been further submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that despite knowledge of the fact that petitioner has purchased the property in auction, petitioner was not impleaded as opposite party in the restoration application. The said restoration application was allowed by the D.R.A.T., Allahabad by order dated 5.5.2025. The D.R.A.T., Allahabad by order dated 5.5.2025 also directed the parties to maintain status quo. It has been further contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that initial order of maintaining status quo dated 12.10.2023 was never extended at any point of time till dismissal of the appeal in default and therefore, D.R.A.T/ has erred in law in restoring the interim order while allowing the restoration application. 5. Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the respondents - borrowers submitted that order passed by the D.R.A.T., Allahabad is perfectly just. It has also been submitted that petitioner has deposited more than amount what borrowers were required to deposit. It has also been submitted that since the Bank was going to take possession, nothing wrong has been committed by the D.R.A.T. in restoring the interim order. 6. Be as it may, since the appeal is against the order rejecting the interim application restraining the Bank from holding auction though it has been prayed in the application that possession may also not be delivered has been rejected and the appeal is pending after restoration. 7. In my view, no useful purpose would be served in keeping this writ petition pending. 8. The Debts Recovery Tribunal, Allahabad is directed to conclude the above-mentioned appeal, in accordance with law, expeditiously, preferably, within a period of eight weeks from the date of filing of a certified copy of this order after providing opportunity of hearing to all the concerned parties provided there is no other legal impediment. 9. With these observations, this writ petition stands disposed of. Order Date :- 19.8.2025 Rishabh [Manish Kumar Nigam, J.] Digitally signed by :- RISHABH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad