Disposed

Venkatesh Alied Solution Co. v. Bank of India

DRAT23 Sept 2022IA/218/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This single judge order disposed of an application for waiver of security deposit filed by the appellant-in-appeal. The Appellate Tribunal found a strong prima facie case and limited the required pre-deposit to 25% of the disputed amount, fixing a deadline for payment.

What did the court decide?

Appellant directed to deposit ₹4.50 Lakhs by 21.10.2022; failure to do so shall result in dismissal of the appeal.

Venkatesh Alied Solution Co. versus Bank of India — Banking and Recovery | DRAT (2022)

¶1

BEFORE THE DEBTS RECOVERY APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, AT: MUMBAI Present: Mr Justice Ashok Menon, Chairperson

¶2

I.A. No. 218/2022 (WoD)

¶3

In Appeal on Diary No.195/2021

¶4

Between

¶5

M/s. Venkatesh Alied Solution Co. … Appellant/s V/s. Authorized Officer, Bank of India & Ors. …Respondent/s

¶6

Ms. P.T. Dhage, Advocate for Appellant.

¶7

Ms. Pallavi Chari, i/b M/s. O.A. Das & Co., Advocate for Respondent.

¶8

-: Order dated: 23/09/2022:-

¶9

The Appellant has come up with an Appeal challenging the impugned order of D.R.T., Aurangabad in M.A. No. 14/2017 which is an application filed along with S.A. under Sec. 17 of the SARFAESI Act for condonation of one day delay in filing the S.A. The S.A. has not been numbered but the application for condonation of delay was taken up for hearing on 16.03.2021. After hearing both sides, the Ld. Presiding Office vide the impugned order dated 16.03.2021 in two lines dismissed the M.A. No. 14/2017 without any order as to costs. It has not been explained what M.A. No. 14/20217 was for, neither has the Ld. Presiding Officer gone into the merits of the case. The Appellant, therefore, has made a good prima facie case to maintain this Appeal. However, for entertaining an Appeal under Sec. 18 of the SARFAESI Act, the Appellant needs to be complied with the second proviso under Sec. 18(1) of the SARFAESI Act.

¶10

The Respondent Bank has filed a reply to the application for waiver of deposit. It is said that the secured asset was sold for a total sum of ₹24,22,000/- and a sum of ₹6.25 Lakhs was returned to the Appellant as excess amount received over and above the amount due to the Bank. That would make the amount due from the Appellant approximately ₹18 Lakhs and in view of the strong prima facie case

¶11

¶12

that the Appellant has. I am inclined to exercise the jurisdiction conferred upon this Tribunal under the third provision to Sec. 18(1) of the SARFAESI Act to limit the pre-deposit to 25% which would come to approximately ₹4.50 Lakhs. The Appellant is, therefore, directed to deposit a sum of ₹4.50 Lakhs on or before 21.10.2022. Failing with the Appeal shall stand dismissed, without any further reference to this Tribunal.

¶13

The amount shall be deposited in the form of a Demand Draft with the Registrar of this Tribunal.

¶14

As and when the said amounts are deposited, they shall be invested in term deposits in the name of Registrar, DRAT, Mumbai, with any nationalized bank, initially for 13 months, and thereafter it will be renewed periodically.

¶15

With these observations, the I.A. is disposed of. The Respondent is at liberty to file a reply in the Appeal with an advance copy to the other side.

¶16

Post on 25.10.2022 for reporting compliance concerning the payment.

Sd/-

Chairperson

mks-12

Venkatesh Alied Solution Co. v. Bank of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Venkatesh Alied Solution Co. v. Bank of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

State Bank of India versus Nagpur Beghar Mitra Gruh Nirman Sahakari Sanstha Ltd. & Ors.

State Bank of India versus Mr C P Ravindranath Menon Liquidator, Bank of Karad(In Liquidator)

Bank of Baroda versus Shri Jayeshbhai Parsottamdas Patel and Ors.

Pratik Kachru Repale versus State Bank of India

Dilip Damodar Patil and Ors. versus Hinduja Leyland Finance Ltd.

M/s. Dharmandan Textiles versus India Bulls Housing Finance Ltd.