Disposed

Shri Mahesh S/O Deodutta Gupta and Ors. v. Reliance Asset Reconstruction Company Ltd.

DRAT28 Oct 2022MISC APPEAL/150/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order grants a pre-deposit of Rupees 1.95 crores to the Appellant for maintaining an appeal against the confirmation of sale of secured assets under the SARFAESI Act. The appeal will be dismissed if payment is not made by the specified date.

What did the court decide?

Pre-deposit of Rs.1.95 crores directed to be made by 03.11.2022; appeal dismissed if not paid.

Shri Mahesh S/O Deodutta Gupta and Ors. versus Reliance Asset… — Banking and Recovery | DRAT (2022)

¶1

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

¶2

IA No. 550/2022 (WoD) In Appeal in Diary No. 984/2022

¶3

Between

¶4

Mr Mahesh S/o Deodatta Gupta & Ors. … Appellant/s

¶5

V/s.

¶6

M/s. Reliance ARC Ltd. …Respondent/s

¶7

Mr M. G. Qubbawala, Advocate for Appellants.

¶8

Mr Rajesh Nagori along with Mr V. Deshpane, i/b M/s. V. Deshpande & Co., Advocate for Respondent.

¶9

-: Order dated: 28/10/2022:-

¶10

This is an application under Sec. 18(1) of the SARFAESI Act for waiver of pre-deposit.

¶11

The Appeal is filed challenging the order of the Presiding Officer, Debts Recovery Tribunal (‘D.R.T.’ in short), Nagpur 28.09.2022 in I.A. No. 1707/2022 in S.A. No. 31/2022 on the files of the aforesaid D.R.T. The Appellants had sought a stay of the sale of the secured assets which was declined, and hence, the Appellants are in Appeal

¶12

It is submitted by the Ld. Counsel appearing for the Respondent that the sale has already been completed and confirmed and the sale certificate has been issued and registered. The Respondent has not filed a

¶13

reply but Ld. Counsel states that the amount due from the Appellants as of 28.09.2022 is Rs.3,91,45,232/-.

¶14

The Ld. Counsel for the Appellants submits that the Appellants are ready to deposit a sum of Rs.2 crores. But the provision under the Second proviso to Sec. 18(1) of the SARFAESI Act is to direct the Appellant to deposit a sum not exceeding 50% of the amount i.e. due or determined. The 50% of the amount would approximately work out to Rs. 1.95 crores. The Appellant are, therefore, directed to deposit a sum of Rs.1.95 crores as pre-deposit under the second proviso to Sec. 18(1) of the SARFAESI Act before 03.11.2022. Failing which, the Appeal shall stand dismissed, without any further reference to this Tribunal.

¶15

It is submitted that the property has already been sold. The auction purchaser is not before this Tribunal. Therefore, no specific direction regarding the auction purchaser’s right can be passed at present. The Respondent shall file a reply in the Appeal.

¶16

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

¶17

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

¶18

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.

¶19

Post on 03.11.2022 for hearing/ compliance of payment.

¶20

Sd/-

¶21

Chairperson

¶22

mks-25

Shri Mahesh S/O Deodutta Gupta and Ors. v. Reliance Asset Reconstruction Company Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shri Mahesh S/O Deodutta Gupta and Ors. v. Reliance Asset Reconstruction Company Ltd.

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

Ashwin Mankeshwar versus Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited

Bank of Baroda versus Mrs Kashmira, d/o Shri Mohan Nihalani

Axis Bank Ltd. and Anr. versus Messr Jay Textiles and Ors.

V Hotels Limited versus Asset Reconstruction Co.(I) Ltd. & Ors.

Shri Siddhi Vinayak Traders versus The Maharashtra State Co-op Ltd. & Ors.

Shri Siddhi Vinayak Traders versus The Maharashtra State Co-op Ltd. & Ors.