Justice Ashok Menon appointed Chairperson of DRAT(M); pending petitions transferred, interim orders continue, deposited amount to Registrar.

The Bombay High Court appointed Justice Ashok Menon as the Chairperson of the Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal, Mumbai (DRAT(M)). Pending writ petitions were not retained, and parties were directed to seek relief from DRAT(M). Existing interim orders were to continue for three weeks, with parties having the option to request their extension or vacation directly from the Chairperson of DRAT(M). The court ordered the transfer of the deposited amount by petitioner MSTC Ltd. to the Registrar of DRAT(M) within two weeks. The writ petitions were disposed of without costs, preserving all arguments for future consideration, emphasizing the smooth transition of cases to the appropriate tribunal post-appointment.

---

---

Issues: Appointment of Chairperson of Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal (DRAT), Transfer of pending writ petitions to DRAT(M), Continuation of interim orders, Transfer of deposited amount by MSTC Ltd.

In a recent judgment by the Bombay High Court, the issue at hand was the appointment of Justice Ashok Menon as the Chairperson of the Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal, Mumbai (DRAT(M)). The court noted the appointment through a letter issued by the Government of India and decided not to keep the pending writ petitions related to the matter. Instead, the parties were directed to approach DRAT(M) for necessary reliefs. It was specified that any interim orders in place would continue for three weeks from the date of the Chairperson's assumption of office at DRAT(M), with the option for parties to seek extension or vacation of such orders directly from the Chairperson of DRAT(M).

Regarding the specific case of the petitioner MSTC Ltd., the court ordered the transfer of the deposited amount made by them with the Prothonotary and Senior Master of the High Court to the Registrar of DRAT(M) within two weeks. The court disposed of the writ petitions without imposing any costs and left all contentions on merits open for future consideration. This judgment highlights the procedural aspects of transferring cases to the appropriate tribunal following the appointment of a Chairperson and ensures the smooth transition of pending matters to the relevant authority for adjudication.

---