PRAKASH GUPTA,J. - (1.) This revision petition has been filed by the petitioner against the order dated 23.05.2017 passed by the learned District Judge, Bharatpur rejecting an application under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC, filed by the petitioner in the civil suit No.34/2017.
(2.) Brief facts giving rise to this revision petition are that the petitioner-Bank issued a notice under Section 13 (2) of The Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security interest Act, 2002 (for short "SARFAESI Act") to enforce its security interest against the three properties specified in the notice which as per the petitioner Bank were mortgaged by the non-petitioners with the petitioner to secure the cash credit facility extended by the petitioner to a partnership firm in the name and style of M/s. Tikaram Industries in which non-petitioners are partners. On receipt of the notice, non-petitioners filed a civil suit No.34/2017 before the learned District Judge, Bharatpur for a decree of declaration to the effect that the mortgage interest of the bank in the non-petitioners' property may be declared unenforceable under the "SARFAESI Act" without interference of the civil court and for a perpetual injunction to the effect that the petitioner must be restrained from enforcing its mortgage interest under Section 13 (2) of the "SARFAESI Act" as it is barred under Section 31 (1) of the said act. In the suit, the petitioner filed an application under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC, claiming that the suit was barred by section 34 of the "SARFAESI Act". The learned District Judge, Bharatpur having heard both the parties, rejected the application with the liberty to the petitioner bank that it may raise the issue in its reply to the suit. Hence, the revision petition.
(3.) I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.;