Petitioners challenged a DRAT order directing a fifty-crore pre-deposit under Section 18(1) SARFAESI before preferring an appeal. Noting their silence to the demand notice since 2016 and absence of prima facie case, the High Court declined interim protection and dismissed the writ petition without costs.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Rameshwar Dilwale
909-WP-9269-24.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO.9269 OF 2024
RAMESHWAR LAXMAN DILWALE
Digitally signed by RAMESHWAR LAXMAN DILWALE Date: 2024.10.11 14:21:24 +0530
Sanjay Kumar Prakash Arora & Ors. .. Petitioners Vs. State Bank of India & Ors. .. Respondents
Mr. Akshay Petkar with Mr. Vivek Punjabi, Adv. Priyansh Jain, Advocates for the petitioners.
Mr. Charles De Souza with Ms. Sharanya Shivaraman, Mr. Padmakar S. Garad, Advocates for the respondent no.1. Mr. Sachin Gite, Advocate for the respondent no.3.
Mr. Parag Tilak, Advocate for the respondent nos.4 and 5.
CORAM : A.S. CHANDURKAR & RAJESH S. PATIL, JJ
DATE : 9th OCTOBER, 2024.
P.C. :
order dated 19th June 2024 passed by the Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal (for short, ‘DRAT’) thereby directing the petitioners to deposit an amount of Rs.50,00,00,000/- (Rupees Fifty crores) as pre-deposit under Section 18(1) of the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002. The DRAT has given cogent reasons in support of its conclusion that there was no prima facie case made out by the petitioners.
1/2
Rameshwar Dilwale
909-WP-9269-24.doc
[ RAJESH S. PATIL, J. ] [ A.S. CHANDURKAR, J. ]
2/2
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the writ petition challenging the DRAT's order directing a Rs.50 crore pre-deposit under Section 18(1) SARFAESI could be entertained given the petitioners' failure to reply to the Section 13(2
2 provisions across 1 enactments
Sanjay Kumar Prakash Arora & Ors.
State Bank of India
A.S. Chandurkar
Rajesh S. Patil
As recorded by the court registry
6 orders share this CNR
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
