Disposed

M/s. V.K.S. Agro Foods Hi-Tech Rice Industry v. Idbi Bank

DRAT5 Sept 2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal rejected an application to reduce the statutory deposit for appealing under the SARFAESI Act from 50% to 25%. Citing a Supreme Court decision, the court held that sale proceeds of challenged assets cannot be considered. The petitioner was directed to deposit 50% of the demanded amount.

What did the court decide?

Direction to deposit 50% of Rs. 4,12,86,939/- (Rs. 2,06,43,469/-) within two weeks to entertain the appeals.

M/s. V.K.S. Agro Foods Hi-Tech Rice Industry versus Idbi Bank — Banking and Recovery | DRAT (2023)

¶1

IN THE DEBT RECOVERY APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AT CHENNAI

¶2

IA 505/2022 in A.IR:356/2022

¶3

M/S V.K.S.Agro Foods Hi Tech Rice Industries V/S Idbi Bank Ltd &Anr

¶4

05/09/2023

¶5

These Applications are filed seeking waiver of statutory deposit required under Section 18 (1) of the SARFAESI Act, 2002, for entertaining the Appeals.

¶6

All the three Appeals are connected among same parties and arising out of a Common Order. It is represented that deposit in one Application would meet the requirements of other two Appeals also.

¶7

Main SAs are filed challenging the E-auction Sale Notice dated 19.06.2020 and Sale held on 08.07.2020.

¶8

Heard both sides.

¶9

Advocate for Petitioner/Appellant submitted, amount demanded as per Demand Notice dated 18.02.2016, is Rs.4,12,86,938.80p. It is submitted that the property is already sold and Bank has realized total amount, considering the same, statutory deposit may be reduced to 25%, for entertaining the Appeals.

¶10

Other side Advocate opposed such request.

¶11

I have perused material papers.

¶12

Admittedly, amount demanded through Demand Notice dated 18.02.2016, is Rs.4,12,86,938.80p. As per recent judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in Sidha Neelkanth Paper Industries Private Limited and Anr. Vs. Prudent ARC Limited and Ors., reported in AIR Online 2023 SC 15 , sale proceeds cannot be taken into consideration for the purpose of statutory deposit, when Sale is under

¶13

challenge. Therefore, that cannot be a ground for reducing the statutory deposit from 50%. No other grounds are urged for reduction. Considering the same, I am of the view that directing Petitioner/Appellant to deposit 50% of Rs.4,12,86,938.80p/- (rounded off to Rs.4,12,86,939/-), would meet the requirement under Section 18 (1) of SARFAESI Act, 2002, for entertaining the Appeals.

¶14

For the above reasons, Petitioner/Appellant shall deposit 50% of Rs Rs.4,12,86,939/-, which comes to Rs.2,06,43,469.5p (rounded off to Rs.2,06,43,469/-) within a period of two weeks from today i.e., on or before 20.09.2023.

¶15

It is made clear that failure to deposit of above amount, the Appeals shall stand rejected. On making such deposit by Petitioner/Appellant, Registrar is to invest the same in a Nationalized Bank, till further orders are passed.

¶16

Post the case on 21.09.2023, for compliance of payment.

¶17

Sd/Chair Person

M/s. V.K.S. Agro Foods Hi-Tech Rice Industry v. Idbi Bank

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/s. V.K.S. Agro Foods Hi-Tech Rice Industry v. Idbi Bank

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

M/s Meal Matrix Developments versus City Union Bank Limited

Sri C. Chandrappa versus Manipal Housing Finance Syndicate Ltd.

Tk Ragavendhra versus Corporation Bank

Mr.Sahadev chalatan & Ors. versus Ksfc & Ors.

P Sasi Kumar versus State Bank of India

P.Kameswari versus State Bank of India & Ors.