Hardial Singh And Another v. Debt Recovery Tribunal-Iii, And ORS.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH CWP No. 10672 of 2017 Decided on : 17.05.2017 Hardial Singh and another . . . Petitioners

Versus

The Debt Recovery Tribunal-III, Chandigarh and others . . . Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARINDER SINGH SIDHU PRESENT: Mr. Mohit Sadana, Advocate for the petitioners.

**** AJAY KUMAR MITTAL, J. (Oral) The petitioners have approached this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking quashing of order dated 06.04.2017 (Annexure P-1), passed by Presiding Officer Officer-I, Debts Recovery Tribunal-III, Chandigarh (respondent No.1.).

2.

It was not disputed by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the order impugned herein i.e. Annexure P-1 is an appealable order under Section 18 of the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 ( in short 'the Act'), before the Debts Recovery (Appellate) Tribunal. 3.

Section 18 of the Act reads thus:- "18. Appeal to Appellate Tribunal

(1) Any person aggrieved, by any order made by the Debts Recovery Tribunal under section 17, may prefer an appeal alongwith such fee, as may be prescribed to the Appellate Tribunal within thirty days from the date of receipt of the order of Debts Recovery Tribunal:

PROVIDED that different fees may be prescribed for filing an appeal by the borrower or by the person other than Jawala Ram 2017.05.19 16:00 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

CWP No. 10672 of 2017 [ 2 ] the borrower:

PROVIDED FURTHER that no appeal shall be entertained unless the borrower has deposited with the Appellate Tribunal fifty per cent. of the amount of debt due from him, as claimed by the secured creditors or determined by the Debts Recovery Tribunal, whichever is less: PROVIDED ALSO that the Appellate Tribunal may, for the reasons to be recorded in writing, reduce the amount to not less than twenty-five per cent. of debt referred to in the second proviso.

(2) Save as otherwise provided in this Act, the Appellate Tribunal shall, as far as may be, dispose of the appeal in accordance with the provisions of the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993 (51 of 1993) and rules made thereunder."

4.

In such a situation, we refrain to entertain the petition and relegate the petitioners to avail the aforesaid alternative remedy, in accordance with law.

5.

Dismissed.

(AJAY KUMAR MITTAL) JUDGE (HARINDER SINGH SIDHU) May 17, 2017 JUDGE J.Ram Whether speaking/reasoned:

Yes/No Whether Reportable:

Yes/No Jawala Ram 2017.05.19 16:00 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh