The Bombay High Court stayed the Debts Recovery Tribunal’s (DRT) order as Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal (DRAT) was not functional due to the post of chairperson lying vacant.
The writ petition, at the instance of a secured creditor, is directed against an order passed by the Debts Recovery Tribunal (DRT), Mumbai on Securitisation Application, being an application of the respondent under section 17 of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002. By the impugned order, the petitioner was directed to restore possession of the secured asset in favor of the respondent by 22nd January, 2022.
The petitioner/secured creditor, aggrieved by the order of Debts Recovery Tribunal , has appealed before the Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal, Mumbai; however, prior to preferring such appeal, it has instituted the writ petition.
Senior Advocate Dwarkadas, appearing for the petitioner/secured creditor, assailed the order of the Debts Recovery Tribunal (DRT) (II) by submitting that it has decided the question of title, by transgressing its jurisdiction.
The division bench of Chief Justice Dipankar Datta and Justice Anil S. Kilor entertained the writ petition as the office of the Chairperson of the Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal (DRAT) (M) is vacant after having regard to the order of Supreme Court in the case of State Bar Council of Madhya Pradesh vs. Union of India.
The court noted that a coordinate Bench of the Court has directed the Union of India to take appropriate steps for expeditious appointment of the Chairperson of the Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal (DRAT) (M).
The court said that if the Chairperson of the Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal (DRAT) (M) is appointed in the near future, the petitioner would have to pursue its appeal before the Chairperson, Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal (DRAT) (M).
The bench further directed the stay of operation of clause (B) of paragraph (42) of the impugned order till 21st February, 2022 or until further orders.
Case title: Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd. v/s Nirvan Birla & Ors.
Citation: WRIT PETITION (L) NO. 71 OF 2022