NARAYAN SHUKLA,J. - (1.) MR .Atul Kumar Singh, learned Advocate put in appearance on behalf of opposite party No.1 and files a short counter affidavit on his behalf. The same is taken on record.
(2.) HEARD Mr.Gopal Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.Sandeep Dixit, learned counsel for opposite party No.2 and Mr.Atul Kumar Singh, learned counsel for opposite party No.1. The petitioner has challenged the order dated 19th of May, 2009, passed by the Civil Judge (Sr.Div.), in Original Suit No.163 of 2009, inter alia, on the ground that the order passed by the Civil Judge is without jurisdiction as the suit filed before him itself is not maintainable in view of Section 17 of the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (here-in-above referred to as the Act, 2002). The Civil Court has taken cognizance against the proceeding initiated under Section 13(2) and 13(4) of the Act, 2002, whereas against the proceeding initiated under the aforesaid Section, the only remedy is to file an application before the Debts Recovery Tribunal under Section 17 of the Act. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the suit is barred by Section 34 of the Act, 2002. Section 35 speaks that the provisions of this Act shall have over riding effect over other laws, notwithstanding anything inconsistent therewith contained in any other law for the time being in force or any instrument having effect by virtue of any such law.
(3.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner further invites the attention of this court towards Section 31 of the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993, which provides that every suit or other proceeding pending before any court immediately before the date of establishment of a Tribunal under this Act, being a suit or proceeding the cause of action where on it is based is such that it would have been, if it had arisen after such establishment, within the jurisdiction of such Tribunal, shall stand transferred on that date to such Tribunal, provided that nothing in this sub-section shall apply to any appeal pending as aforesaid before any court. In this background he submits that the proceeding of the Civil Court as well as the order passed therein is without jurisdiction and deserves to be quashed.;