ANIRUDDHSINH PRATAPSINH GOHIL vs GRUH FINANCE LIMITED & ORS.

Appeal is ADMITTED. Shri Harshadray Dave, learned advocate waives service of notice of admission on behalf of respondent no.1, who can be said to be the main contesting party and Shri Hardik Vora, learned AGP waives service of notice of admission on behalf of respondent no.2 ? District Magistrate, Rajkot.

In the facts and circumstances of the case and with the consent of the learned advocates appearing on behalf of the respective parties, the present Appeal is taken up for final hearing today, more particularly, when there is broad consensus between the learned advocates appearing on behalf of the respective parties to remand the matter to the learned Single Judge and the learned Single Judge to pass an appropriate order in accordance with law and on its own merits after hearing the appellant herein.

Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment and order passed by the learned Single Judge dated 07/12/2016 in Special Civil Application No.20847/2015, the appellant herein ? third party has preferred the present Letters Patent Appeal.

At the outset, it is required to be noted that by the impugned judgment and order the learned Single Judge has quashed and set aside the order passed by respondent no.2 ? District Magistrate, Rajkot dated 23/10/2015 which as such was in favour of the appellant herein and even the same was passed after considering the submissions made by the appellant. It is the case on behalf of the appellant that before

any order is passed by the learned Single Judge quashing and setting aside the order passed by the District Magistrate, Rajkot dated 23/10/2015, which was in favour of the appellant, the appellant was required to be heard. On the other hand, it is the case on behalf of respondent no.1 that as per catena of decisions of this Court in the proceedings under Section 14 of the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002, District Magistrate is not required to adjudicate the dispute between the parties, and therefore, the appellant was not required to be heard before the District Magistrate.

After making some submissions, Shri Harshadray Dave, learned advocate appearing on behalf of respondent no.1, under instructions from respondent no.1 ? original petitioner, has stated at the bar that to avoid any further delay in realizing the amount by taking possession of the disputed property in question and realizing the amount by selling the property, which was mortgaged with respondent no.1, he has no objection if the impugned judgment and order passed by the learned Single Judge is set aside and the matter is remanded to the learned Single Judge to decide the same afresh in accordance with law and on its own merits and after giving an opportunity to all the concerned, including the appellant herein, however, has requested to make suitable observations that all the contentions /defences, which may be available to the original petitioner, with respect to the locus of the appellant and /or at the stage of getting assistance from the District Magistrate under Section 14 of the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 whether the objector like the

appellant is required to be heard or not, be kept open.

Shri Majmudar, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the appellant has stated at the bar that he has no objection if such suitable observations are made.

In view of the above broad consensus between the learned advocates appearing on behalf of the respective parties recorded hereinabove and without further entering into the merits of the case and without expressing anything in favour of either parties, the impugned order passed by the learned Single Judge passed in Special Civil Application No.20847/2015 is hereby quashed and set aside and the matter is remanded to the learned Single Judge to pass an appropriate order in accordance with law on its own merits after giving an opportunity to all the concerned, including the appellant herein, who shall now be respondent no.4 in the main Special Civil Application. All the contentions and defences, which may be available to the respective parties, including the appellant herein are kept open, which may be considered by the learned Single Judge in accordance with law and on its own merits. Learned advocate appearing on behalf of the appellant to file the Vakalatnama in the main Special Civil Application on or before 20/03/2017.

Registry is directed to amend the cause title of the main Special Civil Application accordingly.

Shri Majmudar, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the appellant herein has stated at the bar that he shall file the Vakalatnama on behalf of the newly added respondent no.4 in the main Special Civil Application within a

period of one week from today and he shall appear before the learned Single Judge on the next date of hearing, which may be fixed by this Court and make submissions before the learned Single Judge on the day on which the main Special Civil Application is ordered to be listed for hearing.

Registry is directed to notify the main Special Civil Application before the learned Single Judge now on 23/03/2017 and the learned advocates appearing on behalf of the respective parties to make appropriate submissions before the learned Single Judge on that day so that the learned Single Judge may decide and dispose of the main Special Civil Application on remand at the earliest. Shri N.K. Majmudar, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the appellant has stated at the bar that he shall appear before the learned Single Judge on 23/03/2017 and argue out the case. No adjournment shall be asked by him on that day. Learned advocate appearing on behalf of the appellant is directed to act accordingly. If it is found by the learned Single Judge that the appellant and /or his advocate is not cooperating, it will be open for the learned Single Judge to proceed further with the hearing of the petition ex-parte. The present Appeal is allowed to the aforesaid extent. No order as to costs.

CIVIL APPLICATION No.3865/2017

In view of disposal of the Appeal, no order in the Civil Application and the same stands disposed of accordingly.