The Gujarat High Court recently issued a notice in a plea seeking the quashing of the Notification dated October 4, 2022, bearing S.O. 4719(E) under section 3 of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993.

The matter was listed before the Bench of Chief Justice Aravind Kumar and Justice Ashutosh J. Shastri.

In this case, a PIL was preferred for quashing and setting aside Notification dated October 4, 2022, bearing S.O. 4719(E) under section 3 of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 issued by the Ministry of Finance (Department of Financial Services) whereby all applications involving debt amount of Rs.100 crores and above falling under the jurisdiction of Debts Recovery Tribunal No.1 and Debts Recovery Tribunal No.2, Ahmedabad would be transferred and adjudicated by the Debts Recovery Tribunal No. 1, Mumbai.

Senior Advocate Percy Kavina and Advocate Hiral U Mehta appeared for the applicants/ petitioner and contended that the change of location and Jurisdiction of DRT-1 and DRT-2, Ahmedabad had led to violation of legal rights of representation to the bankers/lenders, borrowers, guarantors, and other stake holders and would also be seriously impinging upon the rights of litigating citizens whose cases were pending.

The Court was also apprised of the fact that the Supreme Court in its earlier decision in the case of State Bar Council of Madhya Pradesh v. Union of India (2021), had, to resolve the problem of non-appointment of presiding officers, requested the concerned High Courts to entertain the matters falling within the jurisdiction of DRTs and DRATs under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

Accordingly, notice was issued to the Additional Solicitor General and January 16, 2023, was fixed as the next date of hearing.

Cause Title- Nipun Praveen Singhvi v. Union of India

Click here to read/download the Order


Gujarat High CourtChief Justice Aravind KumarJustice Ashutosh J. ShastriDebt Recovery Tribunal

Sanjoli N Srivastava