Babita Chauhan and Anr. v. Union Bank of India

Appeal Dy. No. 580/2022 Date: 14.12.2022

Babita Chauhan & Anr. Vs. Union Bank of India

Present: Shri Aman Kumar Srivastava, counsel for the appellants, Shri Sandeep Arora, counsel for the respondent-Bank,

Learned counsel for the appellants submits that as per record, the amount, which has been deposited by the appellant till date is Rs. 67.00 lacs against the demanded amount of Rs. 149.5 lacs, which is more than 40% of the demanded amount. Therefore, the waiver application may be considered and allowed.

Learned counsel for the respondent-Bank contends that as per definition of the debt due, the same also includes the interest component as on date, therefore, the contention raised by the learned counsel for the appellant is misconceived. Therefore, the waiver application may be dismissed.

Learned counsel for the appellant contends that the appellant has approached before the Hon’ble Nainital High Court against the order of the District Magistrate passed under section 14 of the SARFAESI Act , in which interim order has been passed by the Hon’ble Nainital High Court.

In view of the above, list this case for further arguments on the waiver on 28.03.2023.

Justice R. D. Khare Chairperson

VN Giri