Disposed

Mrs Gloria Joseph Cardoza v. Bank of India and Ors.

DRAT11 Oct 2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Tribunal dismissed an application for reduction of the 50% pre-deposit in an appeal challenging a D.R.T. order. Instead of allowing a full reduction, the Chairperson directed the appellant to deposit ₹2 Crores in two installments before November 22, 2022, failing which the appeal would stand dismissed.

What did the court decide?

Directed appellant to deposit ₹2 Cr in two installments by 01/11/2022 and 22/11/2022; failure to comply will lead to dismissal of the appeal.

Mrs Gloria Joseph Cardoza versus Bank of India and Ors. — Banking and Recovery | DRAT (2022)

¶1

BEFORE THE DEBTS RECOVERY APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, AT: MUMBAI Present: Mr Justice Ashok Menon, Chairperson I A No. 422/2022 (WoD)

¶2

In Appeal on Diary No. 887/2022

¶3

Between

¶4

Mrs Gloria Joseph Cardoza … Appellant/s V/s. Bank of India & Ors. …Respondent/s

¶5

Mr Bilal Choughle, Advocate for Appellant. Mr Anant B. Shinde, Advocate for Respondent No. 1.

¶6

Mr Ganeson Iyer along with Mr Nityanand Yadav, Advocate for Respondent No. 2 & 3

¶7

-: Order dated: 11/10/2022:-

¶8

The Appellant has come up with an Appeal challenging the order of D.R.T.-II, Mumbai in O.A. No. 1089/2017 dated 14.07.2022 wherein the Appellant together with the other Defendants were jointly and severally directed to pay a sum of ₹2,66,89,982.61 with the interest at the rate of 10.70% per annum with effect from 01.08.2017 till the date of realization.

¶9

The Appellant has challenged the impugned order on various grounds. It is stated that she is only a guarantor and that even her guarantee was executed without her knowledge and, therefore, she is not liable to pay any amount to the Bank. The D.R.T. has already considered those objections and come to the conclusion that the contentions raised by the Appellant are not sustainable.

¶10

¶11

Under the provision of Sec. 21 of the RDB Act, any Appeal to be entertained needs a pre-deposit of 50% of the amount determined by the D.R.T. to be made. The only discretion granted to this Tribunal is to reduce it by 25% for reasons recorded in writing. Apart from the impecunious condition of the Appellant, no other grounds are stated.

¶12

The Respondent Bank has filed a reply stating that the Appellant has no reasons for getting the mandatory pre-deposit amount reduced. As of the date of the Appeal, there is an outstanding sum of ₹4,09,26,710.28 to be paid to the Respondent Bank. The Ld. Counsel appearing for the Respondent Bank, therefore, insists on a deposit of 50% of the said amount.

¶13

Considering the entire facts and circumstances of this case, I direct the Appellant to deposit a sum of ₹2 Crores in two equal installments. The first installment of ₹1 Crore shall be deposited on or before 01.11.2022 and the second installment of ₹1 Crore shall be deposited on or before 22.11.2022. Failing which, the Appeal shall stand dismissed, without any further reference to this Tribunal.

¶14

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

¶15

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.

¶16

¶17

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.

¶18

Post on 02.11.2022 for reporting compliance concerning the payment.

¶19

Sd/Chairperson

¶20

mks-26

¶21

Mrs Gloria Joseph Cardoza v. Bank of India and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mrs Gloria Joseph Cardoza v. Bank of India and Ors.

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

M/S Platinum Metal & Trading Pvt. Ltd. & Ors. versus State Bank of India

Shailesh Kantilal Patel versus Bank of Baroda & Ors.

Indian Overseas Bank versus Surendrasingh Chabda

Indian Bank versus M/s. Indage Wines

M/s Prabhu Construction and Anr. versus Canara Bank

M/s. K K Associates versus State Bank of India