Disposed

Central Bank of India v. Padmashri Dr. Vitthalrao Vikhe Patil Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Ltd.

DRAT10 Apr 2023MISC APPEAL/59/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal ordered the retention of funds in the Receiver's account and stayed pending orders concerning an impugned interlocutory order regarding revenue sharing from a sugar factory operated under receiver appointment.

What did the court decide?

Amount retained in Receiver's account pending reply/hearing; stay on order directing disbursement.

Central Bank of India versus Padmashri Dr. Vitthalrao Vikhe… — Banking and Recovery | DRAT (2023)

¶1

FORE THE DEBTS RECOVERY APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, AT: MUMBAI Present: Mr Justice Ashok Menon, Chairperson

¶2

Misc. Appeal 59/2023

¶3

Between

¶4

Central Bank of India & Anr. … Appellant/s V/s. Padamshri Dr Vithalrao Vikhe Patil Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Ltd. & Ors. …Respondent/s Mr Umesh Shetty, i/b Mr V.K. Nair, Advocate for Appellant. Mr Rohit Gupta, Advocate for Respondent No. 1.

¶5

-: Order dated: 10/04/2023:-

¶6

The matter is taken up for hearing by way of praecipe dated 03.04.2023 filed by Appellant Bank for seeking urgent relief. 2. The Appellant Banks are before this Tribunal challenging the order of the Debts Recovery Tribunal, Aurangabad (D.R.T.) in interlocutory order dated 22.02.2023 in S.A. No. 209/2021 wherein certain directions were given regarding sharing of the revenue which was generated from the sugar factory by running the plant by appointment of a Receiver. There are certain directions made regarding sharing of revenue between the Appellants and the first Respondent and the certain amount has already been disbursed to the first Respondent and the Appellants are aggrieved by the impugned order regarding the distribution of the income generated and the Appellants seek a stay of the said order. The immediate apprehension of the Appellants is that a sum of ₹ 4,59,92,781/- is

¶7

¶8

being disbursed to the first Respondent as per the email received from the Respondent No.4 Receiver.

¶9

The Appellants have contended that even the S.A. is not maintainable under Sec. 17 of the Securitisation & Reconstruction of Financial Asset & Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (‘SARFAESI Act’, for short) because the first Respondent is not an aggrieved person primarily because no Sarfaesi measures under Sec. 13 has been initiated by the Appellants against the secured assets. However, the Ld. Presiding Officer has not gone into the objections regarding the maintainability of the S.A. and has passed certain interlocutory orders by appointing of Receiver and assuring of the profits received by the Receiver by running the factory. It is also opined by the Ld. Presiding Officer that it was on the consent that such directions were given. However, the Ld. Senior Counsel appearing for the Appellant has submitted that there was no such consent and all those matters will have to be decided in this appeal. However, the apprehension of the Appellants regarding the disbursement of the amount of ₹4.59 crores requires to be stalled for the meanwhile till a detailed reply is filed by the Respondents. 4. The amount shall be retained in the account by the Receiver and not disbursed till further order of this Tribunal. Post on 12.05.2023 for a reply/hearing.

¶10

Sd/Chairperson

¶11

mks-10

¶12

Central Bank of India v. Padmashri Dr. Vitthalrao Vikhe Patil Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Central Bank of India v. Padmashri Dr. Vitthalrao Vikhe Patil Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Goldie Sud versus Punjab National Bank

Goldie Sud versus Punjab National Bank

Shri. Balkrishna Mohiniraj Bhagat(This is) through his LRs versus Punjab National Bank and Ors.

M/s Pranav Omprakash Khake Distilleries versus Union Bank of India

Pranav Omprakash Khake Distilleries Pvt. Ltd. versus Canara Bank

Mr. Rajindra Ghai and Anr. versus Svc Co. Operative Bank Limited