The tribunal granted a stay on further SFAESI measures by directing the appellants to deposit ₹3 crores as pre-deposit in two installments.
Directing the appellants to deposit ₹3 crores in two instalments to secure stay of further SFAESI measures.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
BEFORE THE DEBTS RECOVERY APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, AT: MUMBAI Present: Mr Justice Ashok Menon, Chairperson
I.A. No. 566/2022 (WoD)
In
Appeal on Diary No. 1120/2022
Between
M/s. Wateredge Hospitality Pvt. Ltd. & Ors. … Appellant/s V/s.
The Authorized Officer, State Bank of India
…Respondent/s
Mr Herbert A. Noronha, Advocate for Appellants. Ms. Vinaya Chavan, i/b M/s. Vinaya Chavan & Co., Advocate for Respondent Bank.
-: Order dated: 11/01/2023:-
The Appellants are the Applicants in Securitisation Application No. 292 of 2021 on the files of the Debt Recovery Tribunal-II (D.R.T.), Ahmedabad and impugn the interlocutory order of the Ld. P.O dated 22/08/2022.
1
2
under Sec.14 of the SARFAESI Act against the Appellants for physical possession of the property, and the 1st Appellant company had submitted a response to the proceedings before the District Magistrate, Daman. It is contended that the application before the District Magistrate does not comply with the requirements of the nine-pointer affidavit, which is mandatory. Action was taken against the Appellants for violation of the CRZ Regulation. The Appellants had approached the Hon’ble High Court and obtained an order of maintaining the status quo with regard to the action intended to be taken for the aforesaid violation.
3
demanding the outstanding dues. Symbolic possession was taken on 21/06/2021 in compliance with the Rules. The application filed for physical possession was allowed by the District Magistrate on 23/08/2021. It is also pointed out that the Appellants had admitted their entire liability in the OTS proposal made by them on 11/05/2021. There is no infirmity in the application filed before the District Magistrate under Sec. 14 of the SARFAESI Act. The Respondent contends that as of date, the outstanding dues from the Appellants are ₹11,07,47,331/-. It is submitted that the Appellants have no reason to seek any indulgence in getting the mandatory predeposit reduced.
4
Post on 02.02.2023 for reporting compliance concerning the payment of the first instalment.
Sd/Chairperson
mks-1
5
1 issue framed by the court
Whether pre-deposit is required before invoking Section 18(1) of the SARFAESI Act in an intervention application relating to symbols possession and physical possession proceedings.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
M/s. Wateredge Hospitality Pvt. Ltd.
State Bank of India
Ashok Menon
As recorded by the court registry
10 orders share this CNR
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
