Allowed

M/s. Super Tyre Remoulding Works & Anr. v. State Bank of India

DRAT23 Aug 2022REGULAR APPEAL/58/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Tribunal allowed the appellant borrower to redeem the mortgaged property within 60 days prior to the issuance of the Sale Certificate, directing payment of the outstanding loan amount, interest, and damages to the auction purchaser.

What did the court decide?

Appellant directed to pay entire dues, interest, and interest on auction purchase price within 60 days to prevent confirmation of sale.

M/s. Super Tyre Remoulding Works & Anr. versus… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRAT (2022)

¶1

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

¶2

Appeal No. 57/2017

¶3

Between M/s. Super India, … Appellant/s a Proprietary Concern of Mr. A. Shivan & Anr. V/s. State Bank of India …Respondent/s AND

¶4

Appeal No. 58/2017

¶5

Between

¶6

M/s. Super Tyre Remoulding Work, … Appellant/s a Proprietary Concern of Mr. A. Shivan & Anr. V/s.

¶7

State Bank of India …Respondent/s

¶8

Mr. G. R. Kinkhabwala along with Mr. Manmohan Rao and Ms. Sarika Gawde, Advocate for Appellants.

¶9

Mr. P. Kumar Jain, i/b M/s. Prakash Panjabi & Co, Advocate for Respondent Bank.

¶10

Mr. H. T. Ameta, Advocate for Intervener, the Central Excise Department (G.S.T.).

¶11

Ms. Vaishali Bhilare, Advocate for Auction Purchaser.

¶12

-: Common Order dated: 23/08/2022:-

¶13

Heard the learned counsel appearing for the Appellants and the learned counsel appearing for the Respondent Bank.

¶14

As per the letter sent by the Bank to the Appellant, as of 12.05.2022, the outstanding amount to be paid to the Bank by the Appellant borrower is Rs.2.12 Crores. The Appellant has already 1

¶15

deposited Rs.54 Lakhs before this Tribunal by way of pre-deposit and a further sum of Rs.20 Lakhs is lying in a ‘No Lien Account’ in the name of the Appellant’s son, which is also agreed to be adjusted towards the loan amount due to the Respondent Bank.

¶16

The Appellant submits that for the balance payment, two months’ time may be granted. He undertakes to pay the entire outstanding amount together with the interest. 4. The learned counsel appearing for the Respondent Bank as well as the learned counsel appearing for the Auction Purchaser, who had already deposited the entire sale amount opposes this prayer of granting further time to make payment as the matter has been pending for the last 16 years and the Appellant has not been keen to settle the debt despite there being several opportunities to clear the dues. It is submitted that the ‘One Time Settlement’ proposal made on behalf of the Appellant was also rejected since it did not match the outstanding amount and was not viable. The Appellant now agrees to pay the entire amount dues to the Bank with accrued interest.

¶17

The learned counsel for the Respondent Bank submits that since the entire sale amount has been deposited by the auction purchaser, in case of settling the debt, the amount deposited by the auction purchaser will have to be returned together with interest. Therefore, the Appellant would also have to compensate the amount that is to be paid to the auction purchaser by way of interest.

¶18

Taking all these facts and circumstances into consideration, I find that in view of the fact that the sale which has not yet been confirmed, and a Sale Certificate is yet to be issued to the auction 2

¶19

purchaser, the borrower is at liberty to redeem the mortgage at any time prior to the issuance of the Sale Certificate which confirms the sale making the auction purchaser the absolute the owner of the property. The mortgaged property could be redeemed at any time prior to that.

¶20

Hence, the Appellant is directed to pay the entire amount due on account of the loan together with interest till the date of the payment, and also the interest at the prevailing rate of term deposits that may have to be paid to the auction purchaser on return of the purchase price already deposited by him, within a period of 60 (sixty) days from today i.e. on or before 22.10.2022.

¶21

It is further made clear that in case the Appellant fails to pay the aforesaid amount within 60 days, the sale in favour of the auction purchaser shall be confirmed without any reference Tribunal.

¶22

The learned counsel for the Respondent Bank is directed to file a statement showing the amount due with interest.

¶23

Post on 25.10.2022 for reporting compliance with the above order.

¶24

Sd/Chairperson

¶25

dpj-14 & 15

¶26

M/s. Super Tyre Remoulding Works & Anr. v. State Bank of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/s. Super Tyre Remoulding Works & Anr. v. State Bank of India

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

Prag Computer Services and Anr. versus the Federal Bank Ltd.

Awaite Properties Pvt. Ltd. versus Il and Fs Financial Services Limited

Mrs. Latha Ajitkumar Nair Through her C.A. Shri M.N.Nair versus The Oriental Bank of Commerce and Ors.

Asrec (I) Ltd. versus Sunil Jaidev Sharma

M/S Super India & Anr. versus State Bank of India

Arclil versus O/L of Indo Bonito Multinational Ltd. & Ors.