Sushrut Arvind Dharmadhikari, J
1. The instant writ petition has been filed by the petitioner under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India seeking the following reliefs:-
"a) Quash and set aside the order passed by the Ld. CJM, Dhar dated 22.12.2023 to take the physical possession of the subject property.
b) Quash and set aside the eviction warrant issued by the Ld. Tehsildar Manawar dated 01.04.2024 to take the physical possession of the subject property.
c) To direct the respondent no.2 to keep in abeyance any execution of order passed by the Ld. CJM, Dhar under Section 14 of the Act, 2002.
d ) Any other relief(s), which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit to be granted to the Petitioner under the facts and circumstances of the present case"
2. The grievance of the petitioners are that the petitioners are the borrowers and being aggrieved by the order passed by CJM Dhar dated 22.12.2023 and order dated 01.04.2024, passed by the Ld. Tehsildar, Manawar, they have already preferred an securitization application under Section 17 of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (referred to as "SARFAESI Act" hereinafter) before the Debt Recovery Tribunal, Jabalpur (referred to as "DRT" hereinafter) which was registered as S.A. No.426/2024. However, on account of the Presiding Officer of the D.R.T. being on leave, the hearing of the appeal could not take place, hence, the petition has been filed. It is stated that if the interim protection is not granted to the petitioners, then the whole purpose of filing the appeal shall be frustrated.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that petitioners have already availed the efficacious remedy by filing application u/S 17 of the vide S.A. No.426/2024. Since the Presiding Officer is on leave, the petitioners apprehends execution of the order passed by the CJM, Dhar u/S 14 of the SARFAESI Act by the respondent no.1 who has already issued notice for handing over of vacant possession of the property in question to respondent no.2, which would lead to dispossession of petitioners from the property in question. Hence, present petition is filed with the limited prayer for interim protection till effective hearing of Securitization Application by the DRT, Jabalpur.
4. Learned counsel for the respondent/State has no objection.
5. Heard, learned counsel for both the parties and perused the record.
6. On due consideration, in view of aforesaid circumstances, without adverting to the merits of the matter, it is directed that the status-quo shall be maintained by the respondents till the petitioner's interim application i.e. S.A.426/2024 is decided by the DRT, Jabalpur.
7. It is made clear that this Court has not reflected upon the merits of the case, and the DRT, Jabalpur shall decide the matter on its own merits without being influenced by this order. It is also made clear that prayer made on behalf of the petitioners for further adjournment shall not be considered by the learned DRT.
C.C. as per rules.
