Disposed

M/S. Ashwa Gold through Its Properitor Mayur Suresh Chandra Shah v. Canara Bank

DRAT2 Dec 2022IA/618/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Responding to an application for extension of time to deposit the balance amount under the SARFAESI Act, the Tribunal exercised jurisdiction to extend the deadline by three weeks, subject to dismissal of the appeal upon further failure to comply.

What did the court decide?

Extension of time allowed to deposit balance within three weeks from the order date; appeal to be dismissed if balance not paid.

M/S. Ashwa Gold through Its Properitor Mayur Suresh Chandra… — Banking and Recovery | DRAT (2022)

¶1

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

¶2

I.A. No. 618/2022 (Extension of Time)

¶3

In Appeal on Diary No. 1061/2022

¶4

Between

¶5

M/s. Ashwa Gold … Appellant/s Through Properitor Mayur Suresh Chandra Shah & Anr.

¶6

V/s.

¶7

The Authorized Officer, Canara Bank

¶8

…Respondent/s

¶9

Mr Rajesh Nagori, Advocate for Appellant.

¶10

Ms Vaishali Bhilare, Advocate for Respondent.

¶11

-: Order dated: 02/12/2022:-

¶12

The matter is taken up for hearing by way of Praecipe filed by Appellant seeking urgent relief.

¶13

As per the direction of this Tribunal the Appellant was directed to deposit a total sum of Rs. 75 lakh as per-deposit u/s 18 (1) of the SARFAESI Act. The Appellant has already deposited 45 lakh. Yesterday was the last date to deposit the balance amount but the applicant filed an application as I.A. No. 618/2022 for an extension of time to deposit.

¶14

The learned counsel for the Respondent Bank has opposed the application vehemently stating that the appeal should stand dismissed for non-compliance in tune with the order of this Tribunal. It is true that on the failure of deposit the amount within the time stipulated,

¶15

¶16

the appeal was to stand dismissed. But the application for an extension of time has been filed even before the time expired and the Appellant has proved his bonafides by making payment of a sum of Rs. 45 lakhs. This attempt by the Appellant indicates that he is earnest in making payment, and is not protracting the matter.

¶17

Under the circumstance exercising jurisdiction of this Tribunal u/s 19 (25) of the RDB Act read with Sec. 148 of the CPC, the period is extended, and the Appellant is directed to pay the balance amount within three weeks.

¶18

There shall be no further extension of time. The appeal shall stand dismissed in case of the failure to deposit the amount within the extended time.

¶19

Post on 26.12.2022 for reporting compliance concerning the payment.

¶20

Sd/Chairperson

¶21

psa-05

¶22

M/S. Ashwa Gold through Its Properitor Mayur Suresh Chandra Shah v. Canara Bank

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S. Ashwa Gold through Its Properitor Mayur Suresh Chandra Shah v. Canara Bank

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

Similar cases

Shailesh Kantilal Patel versus Bank of Baroda & Ors.

Trent Limited versus Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd.

N/S Esha Farm Pvt. Ltd. versus Bank of Maharashtra & Ors.

Dilip Damodar Patil versus Hinduja Leyland Finance Ltd.

Asrec (India) Ltd. versus Fastgrowth Hospitality LLP

M/s Kumandas Visanji & Co. versus Punjab National Bank & Ors.