Remanded

Mr Haresh Mohanlal Mehta v. Capri Global Capital Ltd.

DRAT14 Jul 2023MISC APPEAL/68/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In Special Securitization Application No. 304/2019 pending before the Debts Recovery Tribunal, Mumbai, the Chairperson remanded the matter for disposal after noting the Appellant's desire to redeem the mortgage. The interim relief order was not disturbed pending the D.R.T.'s judgment.

What did the court decide?

Appeal remanded to the D.R.T. for consideration of the Securitization Application within three months.

Mr Haresh Mohanlal Mehta versus Capri Global Capital Ltd. — Banking and Recovery | DRAT (2023)

¶1

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

¶2

Misc. Appeal No. 68/2019

¶3

Between

¶4

Haresh Mohanlal Mehta … Appellant/s V/s.

¶5

M/s. Capri Global Capital Ltd. & Ors. …Respondent/s

¶6

Mr. Rajesh Nagori along with Mr. Nilima S., i/b Mr. Onkar Warange, Advocate for Appellant.

¶7

Mr. Dinesh Purandare & Mr. Siddharth S. & Vishal M., i/b M/s. V.M. Legal, Advocate for Respondent No.1

¶8

The Appellant is in Appeal impugning the order dated 03.09.2019 on Interim Application (I.A.) No. 918/2019 in Securitization Application (S.A.) No. 304/2019 on the files of Debts Recovery Tribunal–II, Mumbai(D.R.T.), wherein the Appellant who is a 3^rd party was found not entitled to any interlocutory relief with regard to the Sarfaesi measures initiated by the Respondent against the secured asset. Aggrieved by that, the Appellant has come up on appeal before this Tribunal.

¶9

The Appellant also expresses a desire to redeem the mortgage by paying the entire outstanding amount. This Tribunal vide order dated 24.09.2019, without entering into the merits of the matter and without considering whether the Appellant has a right to invoke section 13 (8) of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (“the SARFAESI Act”, for short) observed that the outstanding amount as

¶10

¶11

per the demand made was ₹ 1,35,15,191/- and the Appellant offered to deposit the amount in tranches. The Appellant complied with the order, and on the basis of the deposit made, this Tribunal directed the Respondents to maintain the status quo till disposal of the Appeal. This Appeal has been pending since 2019.

¶12

I am told that the S.A. No. 304/2019 is still pending before the D.R.T. and is ripe for being disposed of. Without entering into the merits of whether the Appellant is entitled to the right of redemption of the mortgage on the payment of the amount or even without entering into the merits whether the Appellant has the locus to maintain an application u/s 17 (1) of the SARFAESI Act, I am inclined to dispose of the Appeal remanding the matter to the D.R.T. for consideration of S.A. All contentions raised by the parties shall be kept open to be decided in the S.A. The impugned order is not disturbed, and the S.A. shall be disposed of on the basis of evidence produced by the parties by the Tribunal as expeditiously as possible at any rate within the period of three months from the date of receipt of the copy of this order.

¶13

The amount in deposit before this Tribunal shall be transferred to D.R.T.-II, Mumbai, and the order of status quo made by this Tribunal shall continue till the disposal of the S.A. The Appeal is disposed of as above.

¶14

Sd/Chairperson

¶15

psa-21

¶16

Mr Haresh Mohanlal Mehta v. Capri Global Capital Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mr Haresh Mohanlal Mehta v. Capri Global Capital Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Canara Bank versus Woodman Venneers Pvt. Ltd.

Central Bank of India versus Symer Tin Private Limited & Ors.

Murphy Electronics Pvt. Ltd. and Ors. versus Union Bank of India

Khandelwal Sales Corporation and Ors. versus Hdb Financial Services Ltd.

M/S Internatinal Asset Reconstruction Company versus M/S Authoriders Finance Ltd.

Satishbhai Anandbhai Lungariya versus Rbl Bank Limited