Disposed

Sangli Urban Co-Op. Bank Ltd. v. Shri Rohidas Haribhau More

DRAT30 May 2022MISC APPEAL/50/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

DT, Mumbai, held a special appeal challenging a DRT order revoking a sale and directing deposit of proceeds. The Tribunal disposed of the appeal and directed the lower tribunal to maintain status quo regarding the sale pending the special appeal hearings.

What did the court decide?

Directed lower tribunal to maintain status quo in respect of the sale till disposal of the pending special appeal.

Sangli Urban Co-Op. Bank Ltd. versus Shri Rohidas… — Execution and Attachment | DRAT (2022)

¶1

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

¶2

Misc. Appeal No. 50/2022 with I.A. No. 154/2022 (Stay)

¶3

Between

¶4

Sangli Urban Co-operative Bank Ltd., Sangli & … Appellant/s Anr.

¶5

V/s.

¶6

Shri. Rohidas Haribhau More & 4 Ors. …Respondent/s

¶7

Mrs. Madhuri R. Vaidya along with Ms. Ashwini A. Hasbnis and Mr. Vishal Tambe, Advocate for Appellants.

¶8

Mr. G. R. Kinkhabwala, i/b Mr. N. K. Khasbardar and Mr. Dnyaneshwar Avhad, Advocate for Respondent Nos.1 to 3.

¶9

-: Order dated : 30/05/2022 :-

¶10

I.A. No. 154/2022 is an application for stay of the impugned order dated 24.12.2921 passed by the Ld. P.O., D.R.T., Pune, in I.A. No. 194/2021 (actual I.A. No. 294/2021) in S.A. No. 46/2021 wherein the Ld. P.O. has directed the Respondent who is the Applicant in that particular application to deposit certain amounts. A sum of Rs.1.77 Crores was directed to be deposited with the Bank within 4 days and a sum of Rs.1.50 Crores was directed to be deposited with the D.R.T. within 7 days, and it was stated that on such deposits being made, the D.R.T. would be inclined to set aside the sale.

¶11

The Appellant Bank had earlier participated in the auction and put up its bid for the subject property and the sale was also confirmed in favour of the Bank and the Sale Certificate was issued.

¶12

¶13

The S.A. No. 46/2021 is still pending disposal, in which as mentioned in the impugned order, the question regarding charging of Penal Interest as well as the maintainability of the sale of the subject property to the Bank would have to be decided. Hence, the order that on compliance by the debtor, the Tribunal would be inclined to set aside the sale is not happily worded. It is submitted by the Ld. Counsel on either side that status-quo has been maintained.

¶14

I, therefore, find that instead of disposing the application for stay alone, the Appeal itself can be disposed of with a direction to the D.R.T., Pune, to maintain status-quo in respect of the sale till disposal of the S.A. And since the S.A. is for limited points which I have mentioned earlier, the S.A. has to be disposed of as early as possible, preferably within a period of 3 months from the date of receipt of this order by the D.R.T., and with these observations, the Appeal stands disposed of along with I.A. No. 154/2022.

¶15

The Respondents / Applicants have complied with the order of the D.R.T. and furnished D.Ds. to the Bank which have not been appropriated by the Bank since the order was challenged, and later a sum of Rs.1.50 Crores was also deposited by the Respondents with the Tribunal.

¶16

In view of the fact the D.Ds. of Rs.1.77 Crores have been returned by the Bank to Respondents herein, the D.R.T. is at liberty to decide as to what is to be done with those D.Ds. and whether the Respondents may be allowed to deposit the same also with the D.R.T. till disposal of the S.A., on a request being made by the Respondents.

¶17

Sd/Chairperson

¶18

dpj-4

¶19

Sangli Urban Co-Op. Bank Ltd. v. Shri Rohidas Haribhau More

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sangli Urban Co-Op. Bank Ltd. v. Shri Rohidas Haribhau More

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

M/S Quarmatic Time Industries versus State Bank of India

Gangaram Narayandas Through its Prop Shri Kishore Gangaram Lakhwani and Others versus Hdb Financial Services

Uco Bank versus M/S Goenka Jewellers & Ors.

Messrs. Parthesh Developers versus Bank of Baroda

Spectra Motors Limited versus Icici Bank Ltd.

State Bank of India versus M/s. Swati Diamonds & Ors.