court proceeding to disposses when matter pending in DRT
Mathews J. Nedumpara
15 June 2023
98205 35428
Shri PV Pavanesh, Vacation Officer,
Supreme Court of India
New Delhi – 110 001.
In the Supreme Court of India
WP Civil (D) No. 24341 of 2023
BJN Hospitality v/s India Resurgence ARC & Ors.
Sir,
Despite the order of the Supreme Court listing the above case for hearing tomorrow, the Respondent Court Commissioner in grossest disrespect of the Supreme Court nay the very concept of Rule of Law is threatening to dispossess my client and his wife from his residential home. To impress the learned Asst. Registrar of the Bandra Center of Courts that the Supreme Court is in sessin of the matter all the Courts and Tribunals in the territory of India have lost its jurisdiction - This concept is even far superior to the concept of comity – the respect for authority of tribunals of coordinate jurisdiction/place is equivalent to the authority concerned. This principle is known in Latin as in presentia majoris sasat potentia minoris.
Under the circumstances, the act of the Registrar Bandra Center of Courts (Registrar Court Commissioner) / ARC to take physical possession is clear contempt of the Supreme Court of India. The Registrar Court commissioner/ ARC have been repeatedly asserting that they do not care of the contempt of the Supreme Court. The scenario is not merely agonizing but frightening. They care least of the authority of even the Supreme Court of India. For every man his home is his Castle. My clients are senior citizens. I informed them that I spoke with you and that you will try your level best to get a Bench constituted and take up the matter before the Hon’ble judges. My Associates whom I deputed to keep the Registrar Court Commissioner informed are even being threatened of registration of a false FIR u/s 353 IPC which the Police abuses to the hilt fairly with impunity.
In view of what is fore stated, I earnestly request you to take my humble plea to hear my client's cause by hearing the matter in the chambers / residence to which effect a request has already been lodged through my AOR.
With kind Regards and awaiting your immediate response.
Mathews J Nedumpara
To 16.06.2023
The Registrar,
Bandra Centre of Court,
Mumbai
Sub: - SECURITISATION APPLICATION NO.44 of 2023.
Mr. Kishor Balram Nichani ...Applicant
Versus
India Resurgence ARC Trust IV & Ors. ...Respondents
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In challenge of the warrant issued by you dated 15.05.2023 seeking to dispossess my client of his property, I instituted an SA in DRT-II, Mumbai. The DRT after hearing the case for injunction has adjourned the same for pronouncement of orders to 27.7.2023. When the DRT had reserved the case for orders, you were duty bound to wait for the orders. However, acting as an agent of the ARCs, private companies who are engaged in the unscrupulous business of grabbing properties by abusing the SARFAESI Act, you came to dispossess my client. Faced with the said scenario, I moved the Supreme Court and the Hon’ble Court was pleased to list the case for today, 16th June 2023. You ultimately withdrew dispossessing our client, realising that it would amount to contempt of the Supreme Court. In the light of your withdrawal from action, I withdrew the writ petition in the Supreme Court to pursue the remedies open to me in law. It is unthinkable that acting as a tool of the ARCs you have come today to dispossess our client without notice and without any authority of law. Your action amounts to trespass into my client's residential home and violation of his precious fundamental and legal rights. Your action amounts to gross abuse of your powers which will make you liable for civil, criminal and departmental proceedings. We therefore, call upon you to withdraw your action forthwith.
Your's Truly,
Advocate for Petitioner
Nedumpara & Nedumpara
Mathews J Nedumpara
16.06.2023
98205 35428
To,
Hon’ble Shri Nitin Jamdar
Acting Chief Justice
High Court of Bombay
Sub: Illegal dispossession of my client of his residential home by the Asst Registrar, Bandra Centre of Courts without any notice whatsoever - complaint/request for immediate orders restraining her from continuing her illegal action reducing herself into being a pawn at the hands of the ARCs.
My client, an MSME sought protection against dispossession at the hands of the Asst Registrar, Bandra Centre of Courts, by filing an SA in DRT-II, Mumbai. Since the High Court had admitted and ordered notice to the Union of India in certain batch of petitions asserting the rights of MSMEs over the SARFAESI Act, my client, a doctor, filed a writ petition in the Bombay High Court.
The DRT heard my client’s plea for injunction, but on being told by the ARC that a writ petition is pending, and is listed on the very next day, namely, 14th June 2023, did not pass an order on the stay application after having heard the matter at length. The dispossession was scheduled for 15th June 2023. The writ petition in the High court was listed on 14th June and I sought a stay of the dispossession scheduled for 15th. The High Court declined to interfere observing that it is for the DRT to pass an order, arguments having been heard and reserved for orders.
The High Court order, though not unfavourable to my client, was practically of no use because dispossession being the very next day, access to DRT is difficult, it’s procedure being cumbersome.
The High Court was duty bound to either protect the Petitioner from dispossession till the DRT could pass a detailed order, or directed the DRT to pass an order, one way or the other forthwith. It was the duty of the High Court to avoid a scenario as above where the litigant who has approached the court for justice is denied even an order either granting injunction or rejecting injunction. I cannot imagine of a greater injustice, which I am sure your Lordship would take serious notice of.
I moved the Supreme Court overnight, mentioned the matter on 15th June, morning. The judges were pleased to list the matter on 16th. Despite service of notice of the listing of the case in the Supreme Court on 16th, the Asst Registrar and the ARC came with the police. I mentioned the matter before the DB of Justice Kulkarni. The court took the view that I having approached the Supreme Court the High Court has lost jurisdiction. The view of the High Court theoretically is correct. But the Registrar and the ARC do not bother about such legal principles. They were hellbent on dispossessing my client. However, they could not succeed because no dispossession could be effected after sunset.
Today, the matter was listed in the Supreme Court. I withdrew the writ petition with liberty to pursue the legal remedies/forum open to me because in a sense the writ petition had become infructuous, because dispossession did not happen yesterday and no dispossession can be effected without a fresh notice.
While, waiting for my flight back, at around 5pm, I got a desperate call from my client saying that the ARCs, practically a mafia grabbing property abusing the SARFAESI Act, has come to dispossess him from his home. I made a written request to the Registrar and the ARCs to desist from dispossessing my client without a fresh notice. My request having fallen on deaf ears, I am left with no option than to address your Lordship. I am forwarding this letter to the Registrar and other officers of the High Court with a request to bring the same to your lordship’s gracious notice.
I believe, your lordship being the head of the judiciary in the state, will make sure that the Court officers are not used as agents of ARCs and private parties to illegally grab properties of common people.
With kind regards
Yours Sincerely
Mathews J. Nedumpara