Ajit Subhash Mande v. State Bank of India
Case brief
What is this about?
This order admits the appeal on payment of ₹35 lakhs as pre-deposit in a securitization application matter. The appellant challenges the bank's recovery measures including notice insufficiency and auction of assets.
What did the court decide?
Appeal entertained: payment of ₹35 lakhs pre-deposit in three installments by 07.04.2023. Failure to deposit entails dismissal.
What the court decided
BEFORE THE DEBTS RECOVERY APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, AT: MUMBAI Present : Mr. Justice Ashok Menon, Chairperson
I.A. No. 537/2022 (WoD) In Appeal on Diary No. 1070/2022
Between
Dr. Ajit Subhash Mande & Anr. … Appellant/s V/s. State Bank of India & Anr. …Respondent/s
Ms. Anjali Gupta, i/b M/s. Raval-Shah, Advocate for Appellant. Mr Sachin Koli, Advocate for Respondent
The Appellants have come up with an appeal impugning the dismissal of the Securitization Application (SA) No. 13/2021 on the files of the Debts Recovery Tribunal-III, Mumbai (DRT) vide order dated 16.09.2022.
- The Appellants had raised several contentions in the S.A. filed under section 17 of the Securitisation & Reconstruction of Financial Assets & Security Interest Act, 2002 (‘SARFAESI Act’, for short) with regard to the insufficiency of the notice u/s 13 (2) dated 19.01.2018. The subsequent Sarfaesi measures u/s 13 (4) also stand challenged. The Appellants had sought a stay of the auction of the secured assets on the grounds of the violation of Rules. The property has already been sold in the auction and possession has been handed over to the auction purchaser in whose name the Sale Certificate stands registered. Consequently, the SA was dismissed.
1
- The Appellants are in appeal. The total amount that is due accordingly to the Respondent Bank as of the date of the Appeal is ₹ 92,75,901/- which also includes the interest till the date and also the legal expense and other charges.
Issues for consideration
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the appeal on the dismissal of the securitization application prima facie qualifies for consideration by the Tribunal.
Whether a pre-deposit is required to entertain the appeal and if so, the amount and terms thereof.
Parties & counsel
- appellant
Dr. Ajit Subhash Mande & Anr.
- respondent
State Bank of India & Anr.
Coram
Ashok Menon
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
All orders in this case
2 orders share this CNR
- Order 1 — this page · Ashok Menon
- Order 2 · Ashok Menon
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court