Dismissed

Catalyst Trusteeship Ltd. v. Sam Family Trust

DRAT28 Feb 2023MISC APPEAL/35/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This appellant challenged an interim order granting an injunction on sale of properties pending due process before the DRT. The Tribunal declined to examine merits as the lower court was yet to reconsider the application.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the DRT Presiding Officer to dispose of I.A. 06/2023 after hearing both sides on or before 10th March 2023. Reply to be filed within two days.

Catalyst Trusteeship Ltd. versus Sam Family Trust — Execution and Attachment | DRAT (2023)

¶1

BEFORE THE DEBTS RECOVERY APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, AT: MUMBAI Present: Mr Justice Ashok Menon, Chairperson Misc. Appeal No. 35/2023

¶2

Between

¶3

Catalyst Trusteeship & Ors. … Appellant/s V/s.

¶4

SAM Family Trust & Ors. …Respondent/s

¶5

Sr. Counsel Mr. Tushad Cooper and Mr. Rohit Gupta along with Mr. Sachin Chandrana, Mr. Archit Shah and Manan Bhindora, i/b M/s. Manilal Kher Ambalal & Co., Advocate for Appellant.

¶6

Mr. Rafeeq Peermohideen, along with Mr. T.N. Tripathi, i/b M/s. T.N. Tripathi & Co., Advocate for Respondent.

¶7

-: Order dated: 28/02/2023:-

¶8

This is an appeal filed by Appellants challenging the ad-interim order dated 20.02.2023 in I.A. No. 06/2023 in S.A. No. 01/2023 on the files of the Debts Recovery Tribunal (D.R.T.), Pune granting an ad-interim injunction in favour of the Applicants to not confirm the sale of the suit properties till 28.02.2023 though the bids are accepted.

¶9

The Ld. Counsel appearing for the parties submitted across the Bar that today the matter was taken up but not heard by the D.R.T., and has been adjourned to a longer date.

¶10

The Ld. Counsel appearing for the Respondents in this appeal submits that even a reply also has not been filed on I.A. No. 06/2023. It is not sure whether the ad-interim order has been

¶11

¶12

extended or not.

¶13

The impugned order is made without going into the merits of the contentions of the parties. I am therefore not inclined to go into the merits of the case, as the I.A. is still pending consideration before the D.R.T. It is appropriate that the D.R.T. be given an opportunity to consider the application on merits. Reply on I.A. No. 6/2023 before the D.R.T. shall be filed within two days with an advance copy to the other side.

¶14

The appeal is disposed of with a direction to the Ld. Presiding Officer, D.R.T., Pune to dispose of I.A. 06/2023 after hearing both sides, on or before the 10th of March 2023. The contentions raised by both sides are kept open for determination by the D.R.T.

¶15

rm-36

¶16

Catalyst Trusteeship Ltd. v. Sam Family Trust

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Catalyst Trusteeship Ltd. v. Sam Family Trust

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

Similar cases

Ms Phoenix Realtor Pvt. Ltd. versus Punjab National Bank

Gpt Steel Industries Ltd. versus State Bank of India

Osmanabad Janata Sahakari Bank Ltd. versus Ulhas Shivajirao Gapat

Pradip J. Mundhra versus Punjab National Bank

State Bank of India & Ors. versus Official Liquidator High Court Bombay being the liquidator of M/s Parth Foils Pvt. Ltd. and Ors.

Dhanraj s/o Shravan Korde versus Union Bank of India