Anil Kumar Gupta v. Bank of India
Case brief
What is this about?
The high court disposed of an appeal against an interim DRT order. It held that no pre-deposit was needed as the bank recovered the full amount via auction. The appeal was dismissed subject to a direction to the DRT to decide the main appeal expeditively with status quo maintained.
What did the court decide?
Waiver of pre-deposit allowed; direction to DRT to decide main appeal within two months; status quo maintained.
What the court decided
Appeal Dy. No. 1098/2022 Date: 05.01.2023
Anil Kumar Gupta Vs. Bank of India
Present: Shri K. Kartikeya, counsel for the appellant,
Shri Ankur Gupta, Advocate files his vakalatnama on behalf of the respondent-Bank, which is taken on record.
It has been contended by the learned counsel for the appellant that as per the demand notice dated 01.11.2019, the amount due against the appellant was Rs. 24,76,057.95 along with interest and the property has been sold by the respondent-Bank for a sum of Rs. 85.00 lacs, therefore, no amount is required to be deposited towards pre-deposit. As such the waiver application may be allowed.
The present appeal has been filed under section 18 of the SARFAESI Act against the interim order dated 24.11.2022 passed by the DRT, Allahabad in S.A. No. 312/2020. The report of the Registrar dated 12.12.2022 shows that the I.A. No. 673/2022 being urgency application and I.A. No. 674/2022 being waiver application have been filed.
As the matter has been taken up today, therefore the urgency application being IA No. 673/2022 is disposed off as such.
Since more than the demanded amount has been recovered by the respondent-Bank from auction sale of the property in question, therefore, no further amount is required to be deposited by the appellant for maintaining the appeal. Accordingly, the waiver application is allowed.
Learned counsel for the appellant further contends that partial possession of the property in question has been taken over by the Bank and the appellant is in possession of the open area
Issues for consideration
2 issues framed by the court
Whether pre-deposit towards appeal is required when auction proceeds exceed the due amount.
Whether the subordinate appellate Tribunal should decide the impugned order with directions for expedited disposal.
Parties & counsel
- appellant
Anil Kumar Gupta
- respondent
Bank of India
Coram
R. D. Khare
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
- Court
- DRAT
- Decided on
- · January
- CNR
- 091090010982022
- Topic
- Banking and Recovery
All orders in this case
2 orders share this CNR
- Order 1 · LD Registrar
- Order 2 — this page · Rajesh Dayal Khare
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court