Disposed

Maa Shanti Rice Industries And Others v. Bajaj Finance Ltd. and Anr.

DRAT2 May 2022REGULAR APPEAL/212/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Appeal against dismissal of SARFAESI application. Tribunal noted pending waiver application for pre-deposit under Section 18 SARFAESI Act and four-year lapse without deposit. Adjourned, directed supply of waiver application, warned against further delays, and listed next date.

What did the court decide?

Appeal adjourned; appellant directed to supply copy of Section 18 waiver application; respondents to file objection within a week.

Maa Shanti Rice Industries And Others versus Bajaj Finance… — Banking and Recovery | DRAT (2022)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AT KOLKATA

¶2

(Appeal No. 212 of 2018)

¶3

(Arising out of S.A. 65 of 2017 in DRT, Cuttack)

¶4

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SRIVASTAVA CHAIRPERSON

¶5

02.05.2022 Maa Shanti Rice Industries & Others … Appellants -vsBajaj Finance Limited … Respondent Mr. Ajit Keshari, Learned Counsel for Appellant Mr. Tirthankar Dey, Learned Counsel for Respondent/Bajaj Finance Mr. Rajeev Maity, Learned Counsel for Phoenix Arc Private Limited

¶6

THE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL :

¶7

Heard the Learned Counsel for the parties and perused the record.

¶8

This appeal is preferred against the judgment and order dated 8^th January, 2018 passed in S.A. 65 of 2017 whereby the SARFAESI Application was dismissed. Subsequent thereto, an application for substitution was filed on behalf of Phoenix Arc Private Limited, being I.A. 250 of 2018, for substituting Respondent No. 1, Bajaj Finance Limited.

¶9

During the course of hearing, it transpires that an application, being I.A. 61 of 2018, under Section 18 of the SARFAESI Act, 2002, for waiver of pre-deposit has been filed which is pending since 2018 but till today the Appellant

¶10

¶11

has not deposited the required amount as provided under the Act.

¶12

At the time of hearing, Learned Counsel for the Appellant prays for some time. It appears after filing of the appeal, four years have elapsed but till date no deposit has been made; it is misuse of process of law. However, keeping in view the request of the Appellant, the matter is adjourned for the day.

¶13

Appellant is directed to supply copy of the I.A. 61 of 2018 to the Respondents within three days. Respondents, upon receipt of the copy may file objection to the I.A. within a week with advance copy to the Appellant.

¶14

Be it noted, no further adjournment, whatsoever, shall be entertained. In the event Appellants fails to appear on the next date, the matter will be heard in their absence and shall be disposed of.

¶15

List the matter on 18^th May, 2022.

¶16

(Anil Kumar Srivastava,J) Chairperson

¶17

Dated: 2^nd May, 2022 12/ac

Maa Shanti Rice Industries And Others v. Bajaj Finance Ltd. and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Maa Shanti Rice Industries And Others v. Bajaj Finance Ltd. and Anr.

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

State Bank of India versus Partha Sarathi Mallick

Sri Farooq Ali versus Asrec India Ltd. and Ors.

State Bank Of India and Ors. versus Ms Meena Fashion and Ors.

G Gopala Rao versus the Authorised Officer Union Bank of India

Smt Indira Srinivas Mawle versus State Bank of India

Ghosh Brothers Automobiles versus Hdfc Bank Ltd.