Ravinder Gupta v. State Bank of India & Anr

O R D E R %

10.11.2016 As per the amended Section of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002, Debt Recovery Tribunal has power to deal with objections of the tenant, thus, objections of the tenant (petitioner) have not been entertained by the learned CMM. I do not find any jurisdictional error in the impugned order. Petitioner is at liberty to approach the Debt Recovery Tribunal for redressal of his grievances. Petition is dismissed. Miscellaneous applications are disposed of as infructuous.

A.K. PATHAK, J. NOVEMBER 10, 2016 rb

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(CRL) 3241/2016 & Crl.M.A. nos. 17565-66/2016 RAVINDER GUPTA ..... Petitioner Through :Mr. Deepak Khosla and Mr. Bharat Arora, Advs. versus STATE BANK OF INDIA & ANR. ..... Respondents Through :Mr. Ashish Kumar & Ms. Srishti Gupta, Advs. with Mr. Amrik Ram, Chief Manager (Law) for respondent no. 1 Mr. Rajiv Kapur, Adv. for respondent no. 2 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. PATHAK