PHOENIX ARC LIMITEDversusREGISTRAR DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL I MUMBAI AND ORS

                                                                                               6_WP8183_26.doc



                                       IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                                 CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
                                                 WRIT PETITION NO.8183 OF 2026

                              Phoenix ARC Limited                                    …       Petitioner
                              Vs.
                              Registrar Debts Recovery Tribunal I Mumbai
                              and others                                             …       Respondents

                              Mr. Manaswi Agrawal a/w. Mr. Sharanya Shivaraman and Mr. Vishal Latange for
                              Petitioner.
                              None for Respondents.
                                                          CORAM : MANISH PITALE &
                                                                  SHREERAM V. SHIRSAT, JJ.
                                                          DATE      : JULY 10, 2026

                              P.C. :

                              .        The   petitioner   has   approached   this    Court    in   peculiar
                              circumstances seeking a direction for the actual issuance of recovery
                              certificate. It is the case of the petitioner that although an order for
                              issuing such recovery certificate was passed as far back as on
                              12.01.2024 by the Debts Recovery Tribunal-I, Mumbai (DRT), the
                              administrative act of actually issuing the recovery certificate has not
                              been carried out despite the fact that more than 2 ½ years have gone by.

                              2.       This Court finds it surprising that the petitioner is required to
                              knock the doors of the writ court for such a relief.

                              3.       It is brought to our notice that mentioning was also made before
                              the DRT with respect to the aforesaid grievance of the petitioner but till
MINAL by
           Digitally signed
          MINAL

SANDIP Date:
       SANDIP PARAB


PARAB 2026.07.10
       17:41:28 +0530
                              date, the recovery certificate has not been issued.

                              4.       The document at exhibit-G is a copy of the order dated
                              12.01.2024 passed by the DRT, which reads as follows:-
                                       “1. By way of the present TMA the Applicant is praying
                                       that the Recovery certificate may be issued as the Defendant


                                                                                                          1/3
                                                               6_WP8183_26.doc



       fail to abide the terms of the consent term which are arrived
       between the parties and recorded in the order dt.03/07/2015.

       2.    Heard Ld. Counsel for the Applicant.

       3.     In view of the facts mentioned in present TMA, the
       same is hereby allowed and Recovery Certificate is issued for
       an amount of Rs.17,32,00,000/- as on 01/04/2015 alongwith
       interest @24% p.a. compounded monthly as prayed.

       4.    With the above said direction the present TMA is
       disposed off.

       File be closed and consigned to record.”

5.    The petitioner has specifically pleaded in paragraph 4(i) and (j) as
follows:-
       “i.    Despite the Order passed in the MA, Respondent No.1
       has failed to issue a Recovery Certificate in the MA. Since the
       passing of the Order, the Petitioner has been taking steps to
       pursue Respondent No.1 for issuance of the Recovery
       Certificate. The Petitioner has also mentioned the MA before
       the Learned Presiding Officer, the Debts Recovery Tribunal – I,
       Mumbai on various occasions, to pursue the issuance of the
       Recovery Certificate in accordance with the Order passed in the
       MA. Despite the aforesaid, Respondent No.1 has failed and
       neglected to issue the Recovery Certificate.
       j.     It would not be out of place to mention that the Learned
       Presiding Officer, Debts Recovery Tribunal – I, Mumbai who
       passed the Order in the MA, has since demitted office.
       However, the new Presiding Officer had taken charge with
       effect from January 16, 2025. In these circumstances, the
       Recovery Certificate ought to be issued in favour of the
       Petitioner forthwith in accordance with the Order dated January
       12, 2024 passed in the MA.”

6.    Considering the said grievance raised on behalf of the petitioner,
we are inclined to dispose of this writ petition by issuing an appropriate
direction.

7.    The writ petition is disposed of by directing that the recovery
certificate shall be issued in favour of the petitioner within three weeks


                                                                          2/3
                                                           6_WP8183_26.doc



from today.

8.      Pending application, if any, stands disposed of.



(SHREERAM V. SHIRSAT, J.)                       (MANISH PITALE, J.)




Minal Parab




                                                                      3/3