Dismissed

Indian Overseas Bank v. M/S. Palm Kernel India Pvt. Ltd.

DRAT17 Oct 2022MISC APPEAL/41/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal dismissed an appeal where the appellant raised apprehension about proper disposal of a Summary Application. The Bench held that the lower D.R.T.'s decision to consider restoration is not a challengeable order under the SARFAESI Act.

What did the court decide?

The appeal was disposed of without being entertained by the Tribunal.

Indian Overseas Bank versus M/S. Palm Kernel India Pvt. Ltd. — Banking and Recovery | DRAT (2022)

¶1

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

¶2

I.A. On Diary No. 1065/2022 In

¶3

(Misc. Appeal No. 41/2022 –disposed of)

¶4

Between

¶5

Indian Overseas Bank. … Appellant/s

¶6

V/s.

¶7

M/s. Palm Kernel India Pvt. Ltd. & Ors. …Respondent/s

¶8

Mr Raghavan Sarathy, along with Mr Raj Dani, i/b M/s. Thodur Law Associates, Advocate for Appellant.

¶9

-: Order dated: 17/10/2022:-

¶10

The matter is taken up for hearing by way of Praecipe filed on 14.10.2022 by the Appellant seeking urgent relief.

¶11

The Appellant had approached this Tribunal with Misc. Appeal No. 41/2022 which was disposed of vide order dated 08.07.2022 without entering into merits but with the direction to the D.R.T., Pune to dispose of S.A. No. 207/2018 as expeditiously as possible at any rate within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of the order. Thereafter, the Appellant had again approached this Tribunal with an application for speaking to the minutes wherein it is clarified that there was no order made by this Tribunal in the Appeal on the merits and the Presiding Officer, D.R.T., Pune is at liberty to arrive at an independent decision based on the contentions and averment

¶12

¶13

raised in the S.A. Thereafter, the S.A. was taken up for hearing. The Applicant did not pursue the matter as a result of which I am told that the S.A. was dismissed on 28.09.2022. The Applicant, thereafter, filed an application as M.A. No. 60/2022 for restoration of S.A. which was dismissed for default.

¶14

The Ld. Counsel for the Appellant submits that the intention of the Respondent herein is to protract the matter and get over the direction of this Tribunal to the D.R.T. to dispose of the S.A. within four weeks.

¶15

The Respondent has deliberately let the S.A. to be dismissed on default have now approached the D.R.T. for restoration of the S.A submits the Ld. Counsel appearing for the Appellant. This application stands posted for consideration today and the apprehension of the Appellant is that the favourable order may be made in that the application and the Sarfaesi measures taken against secured assets may come to a stall.

¶16

Heard the Ld. Counsel appearing for the Appellant. The apprehension of the Appellant does appear to be misplaced. The Applicant whose S.A. was dismissed for default can file an application for restoration of the S.A. and it is for the D.R.T. to decide whether that application has to be allowed or not. Entertaining that application is not an order which can be challenged in an Appeal under Sec. 18 of the SARFAESI Act and therefore, I am not inclined to entertain the Appeal and the Appeal is disposed of. The M.A. shall be considered on its merits by the D.R.T. keeping

¶17

¶18

in view the observation of this Tribunal to dispose of S.A. itself within four weeks as directed in the order dated 08.07.2022.

¶19

Sd/Chairperson

¶20

mks-40

¶21

Indian Overseas Bank v. M/S. Palm Kernel India Pvt. Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Indian Overseas Bank v. M/S. Palm Kernel India Pvt. 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

Chokshi Jayshree and Anr. versus Bank of Baroda (Vijaya Bank)

Shri Nivrutti Namdev Wagh versus Ravindra Sakharam Nagre

Piramal Capital and Housing Finance Limited versus Vivaswan Industries and Ors.

Deepak Mhatre versus Bank of India

Indostar Capital Finance Limited versus Santos Uttam Sawane

Bank of Baroda versus State Bank of India and Ors.