Vilnay Gupta & Ors v. Union Bank of India & Anr

O R D E R %

31.03.2016 CMs.4276/2016 & 4277/2016 (revival & stay)

¶1Notwithstanding process fee not been filed counsel as above appears for respondent No.1 and informs that independent of the bank taking resort to remedy under Section 13 of SARFAESI 2002, the bank has a decree in its favour under Section 17 of The Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993, and in execution thereof the subject property has been attached.

¶2The argument therefore would be that it is irrelevant whether action under SARFAESI could continue or not for the reason the property stands attached in execution of a decree.

¶3Learned counsel for the petitioner wants to take instructions.

¶4Renotified for April 05, 2016.

PRADEEP NANDRAJOG, J.

MUKTA GUPTA, J. MARCH 31, 2016 /'ga'

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 8241/2010 VILNAY GUPTA & ORS ..... Petitioner Represented by: Mr.Dharmender Sharma, Adv. versus UNION BANK OF INDIA & ANR ..... Respondent Represented by: Mr.Janendra Lal, Adv. for UBI/R-1. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA