SILVERLINE TECHNOLOGIES LTD Vs. DEVELOPMENT BANK OF SINGAPORE
DEBTS RECOVERY APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
Click here to view full judgement.
(1.) A short question which arises in this appeal is whether the Recovery Officer can issue a sale certificate in respect of the immovable property which was in the possession of D.R.T. receiver and sold by a private treaty as sanctioned by the Recovery Officer.
(2.) The above question arises in the following circumstances:
The sale certificate issued earlier was withdrawn by an order dated 17th, July, 2006 passed by the Recovery Officer of D.R.T.-II, Mumbai against which the appeal filed before the D.R.T was also dismissed on 7th August, 2006 which order is impugned in the present appeal.
While dismissing the appeal, the D.R.T.-II has observed that if the sale is by private treaty, the sale certificate cannot be issued by the Tribunal. It is further observed that the sale certificate is issued by the Tribunal in a case in which the Recovery Officer himself undertakes to sell and not in a sale by private treaty in which the Recovery Officer has no role to play and therefore he dismissed the appeal from the facts which have been placed on record and presented before me I do not think that the impugned order of the D.R.T. can be sustained.
(3.) THE facts briefly stated which are relevant for the purpose of deciding the above question are as follows:
THE respondent No. 1 Bank had filed an Original Application against the appellants for recovery of their dues. THE respondent No. 2 Bank is the debenture trustee representing the diverse debenture holders like J & K Bank, Bank of Bahrain and Kuwait, Ratnakar Bank, etc. THE respondent No. 3 who was impleaded as a party had obtained a decree against the appellants and was also having prior interest in the property of the appellants. THE respondent No. 4 is the purchaser of the appellants' property. THE property of the appellants was an immovable property situated at Dhokali, Kolshet Road, Thane (West).;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.