Yes Bank Limited v. Pax Hygiene Pvt Ltd
Jayshri Lande 15-WP-10294-2025.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
Digitally signed by JYOTI PRAKASH PAWAR Date:
2025.09.17 10:53:05 +0530 JYOTI PRAKASH PAWAR CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 10294 OF 2025 YES Bank Limited ... Petitioner
Versus
1. PAX Hygiene Private Limited and Ors.,
...Respondents
_______________________________________ Mr. Cyrus Ardeshir, Senior Counsel i/b. Apoorva Kulkarni for Petitioner Mr. Shubham Shinde for Respondent No.1 Mr. Xerxes Batliwala representative Respondent No.4 present _______________________________________ CORAM : R.I. CHAGLA AND FARHAN P. DUBASH, JJ.
DATE : 15th SEPTEMBER 2025 ORDER :
1.
The Petitioner is pressing its alternative prayer viz. prayer clause (b) of the Writ Petition, which is directing the Debt Recovery Tribunal-I, Mumbai to expeditiously pass reasoned order in Interim Application No.896 of 2025 in Securitisation Application No.86 of 2025. 2.
Mr. Cyrus Ardeshir, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the Petitioner has referred to the prior orders passed by the Debts Recovery Tribunal - I in the above Interim Application No.896/2025, which are on 1/3
Jayshri Lande 15-WP-10294-2025.doc 21st May 2025, 3rd June 2025, 12th June 2025, 11th July 2025, 13th August 2025 and 15th September 2025. The Interim Application has by the said orders been adjourned firstly for filing of Written Submissions, and after the filing of the same on 12th June 2025, on the pretext that the Presiding Officer required clarification on the argument notes, which had been filed. He has submitted that even today, when the matter has come up before the Debts Recovery Tribunal - I, the Presiding Officer has adjourned the matter to 26th September, 2025 on the same pretext viz. requiring clarification on the argument notes.
3.
Mr. Ardeshir has accordingly sought a direction to the Debts Recovery Tribunal - I, Mumbai to conclude the hearing on the adjourned date and pass order on Interim Application No.896 of 2025. 4.
Mr. Shubham Shinde, the Learned Advocate for Respondent No.1 has sought time on the ground that Vakalatnama is required to be filed by the Advocate.
5.
We have considered the prior orders passed by the Debts Recovery Tribunal-I, Mumbai and it appears that the Presiding Officer of the DRT-I is still to conclude the hearing of the Interim Application inspite of it having been listed on several dates. The Interim Application is a Stay Application and this cannot be prolonged indefinitely. 6.
Accordingly, we direct the Presiding Officer of Debts Recovery Tribunal-I, Mumbai to conclude the hearing of the Interim Application 2/3
Jayshri Lande 15-WP-10294-2025.doc No.896 of 2025 in the above Securitisation Application on the next date and pass order thereupon within a period of one week from concluding the hearing.
7.
The Writ Petition is accordingly disposed of in the above terms. 8.
There shall be no order as to costs.
9.
The Vakalatnama of the advocate for the Respondent No.1 shall be filed by 17th September 2025.
( FARHAN P. DUBASH, J. ) ( R.I. CHAGLA J. ) 3/3