The Authorised Officer v. Mr.V.Ravichandran

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 18.09.2020

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.M.SUNDRESH and THE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE R.HEMALATHA C.R.P.(PD).Nos. 1224 & 1226 of 2020 & C.M.P.Nos. 6649 to 6651 of 2020 The Authorized Officer, Indian Overseas Bank, Asset Recovery Management Branch, No.763, Anna Salai, Central Office, Chennai - 600 002.

.. Petitioner in both CRPs Vs.

V.Ravichandran .. Respondent in both CRPs Civil Revision Petitions filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India praying to set aside the order dated 02/03/2020 made in I.A.No.234 of 2020 in SA No.62 of 2020 on the file of DRT - II Chennai and struck off the application bearing S.A.No.62/2020 on the file of DRT - II, Chennai.

For Petitioner (in both) ..

Mr.F.B.Benjamin George For Respondent (in both) ..

Mr.V.Raghavachari for Mr.M.Narayanasamy

COMMON ORDER (Order of the Court was made by M.M.SUNDRESH, J.) These two revision petitions have been filed against maintaining of the main application before the Debts Recovery Tribunal followed by the interim order granted.

2. We have heard Mr.F.B.Benjamin George, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr.V.Raghavachari, learned counsel appearing for Mr.M.Narayanaswamy for the respondent.

3. From the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for the parties, nothing survives in these two revision petitions since the very challenge made to the sale notice which is no longer in existence since the sale which took place stood cancelled and, therefore, there is no basis for the application in S.A.No. 62 of 2020 which has become infructuous and the consequential interim order granted. Hence there is nothing else to be decided by the Debts Recovery Tribunal in the said main application filed in S.A.No.62 of 2020.

4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that had the Debts Recovery Tribunal considered the relevant materials including the earlier proceedings inter se parties particularly the fact that the contesting respondent did not comply with the conditional order, such a situation would not have arisen.

5. We do not wish to consider the said submission. If the contesting respondent files such an application in future, against any of the action to be initiated by the petitioner, the Debts Recovery Tribunal is expected to consider the relevant materials including the orders passed by this Court which obviously includes the conditional order passed.

6. With the above said observation, the civil revision petitions stand closed. No costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.

(M.M.S., J.) (R.H., J.) 18.09.2020 Index:Yes/No mmi/ssm

M.M.SUNDRESH, J.

and R.HEMALATHA,J.

mmi/ssm To The Presiding Officer, Debts Recovery Tribunal II, Chennai.

C.R.P (PD) Nos. 1224 & 1226 of 2020 18.09.2020