Allowed

Pradeep Madhukant Kotecha v. Nkgsb Cooperative Bank Limited

DRAT20 Oct 2023IA/708/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The DRAT directed the Appellant to deposit ₹30 lakhs as a predeposit before complying with Section 18(1) of the SARFAESI Act to maintain the appeal challenging possession measures. The appeal was admitted to retain a filed police complaint regarding forged signatures but is contingent upon pre-deposit compliance.

What did the court decide?

Appellant directed to deposit ₹30 lakhs as predeposit; taking over possession of property deferred pending payment.

Pradeep Madhukant Kotecha versus Nkgsb Cooperative Bank Limited — Banking and Recovery | DRAT (2023)

¶1

BEFORE THE DEBTS RECOVERY APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, AT: MUMBAI Present: Mr. Justice Ashok Menon, Chairperson I.A. No. 708/2023 (WoD)

¶2

In Appeal on Diary No. 1908/2023

¶3

Between

¶4

Pradeep Madhukant Kotecha … Appellant/s V/s. NKGSB Co-operative Bank Ltd. …Respondent/s

¶5

Mr. Amit Tungare, Advocate for Applicant. An Advocate for the Respondent is present.

¶6

The matter is taken up for hearing by way of a praecipe filed by the Appellant for seeking urgent relief.

¶7

The Appellant is in appeal impugning the order dated 12.09.2023 in Securitization Application (S.A.) No. 182/2023 on the files of the Debts Recovery Tribunal-I, Mumbai (D.R.T.) wherein the Ld. Presiding Officer declined to grant any relief protecting the Appellant’s possession of the secured assets. The Appellant has raised a number of contentions in the S.A. It is stated that he has not mortgaged his property nor is he a guarantor to the debt availed by the original borrowers. It is also stated his purported signatures on the security documents are forged.

¶8

The Appellant is alleged to be a guarantor and it would take some time and evidence for him to establish that his signatures were forged. It is submitted that he has filed a police complaint which is under investigation. To entertain this appeal, the Appellant will first

¶9

¶10

have to comply with and cross the hurdle of making a pre-deposit as contemplated under 18 (1) of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (“SARFAESI Act” for short).

¶11

The demand notice under 13 (2) demands a total outstanding sum of ₹66,46,090.37 as of 30.11.2020. The Appellant has challenged all the Sarfaesi measures up to the action taken under 13 (4) and therefore, as per the latest decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India Sidha Neelkanth Paper Industries Pvt. Ltd. & Ano. vs. Prudent ARC Ltd & Ors., 2023 OnLine SC 12, the threshold amount for calculating the pre-deposit is the amount mentioned in the demand notice.

¶12

The Appellant states that he is a senior citizen aged 81 years old and does not have any source of income. The Appellant has not produced any documents to prove that he is under financial strain. Under the circumstances, I direct the Appellant to deposit a sum of ₹30 lakhs as pre-deposit in two equal instalments of ₹15 lakhs each as hereunder.

¶13

Numbers of Instalments	Payment on or before
1^stInstalment of₹15,00,000/-	03.11.2023
2^ndInstalment of₹15,00,000/-	17.11.2023

¶14

On the payment of the 1^st instalment, the Appellant shall be entitled to get the measure of taking over possession of the property deferred till the next date of hearing.

¶15

Default in payment of any of the instalments shall entail in dismissal of the appeal without any further reference to this Tribunal.

¶16

¶17

The amount shall be deposited in the form of a Demand Draft with the Registrar of this Tribunal.

¶18

As and when the said amounts are deposited, they shall be invested in term deposits in the name of Registrar, DRAT, Mumbai, with any nationalised bank, initially for 13 months, and thereafter to be renewed periodically.

¶19

With these observations, the I.A. is disposed of. The Respondents is at liberty to file a reply in the Appeal with an advance copy to the other side.

¶20

Post on 08.11.2023 for reporting compliance regarding the payment of the 1^st instalment.

¶21

Sd/Chairperson

¶22

psa-01 (SB)

¶23

Pradeep Madhukant Kotecha v. Nkgsb Cooperative Bank Limited

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pradeep Madhukant Kotecha v. Nkgsb Cooperative Bank Limited

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

Similar cases

Bandhan Bank Ltd. versus Smt Parul P Shah and Ors.

Bank of Maharashtra versus M/s. Prajakta International and Ors.

Axis Bank versus Exim Bank and others

Suhail Y Khandwani versus Central Bank of India

M/s. Uttam Foma Techno Cast Pvt. Ltd. versus M/s. Bony Polymers Pvt. Ltd. & Anr.

M S Uttam Foma Techno-Cast Private Limited versus Idbi Bank and Ors.