Dismissed

Mrs K Letchoumy Kanagarajan v. State Bank of India

DRAT14 Dec 2023REGULAR APPEAL/140/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this application before the Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal, the petitioner sought a waiver of the 50% statutory deposit under Section 18(1) of the SARFAESI Act, 2002. The Tribunal dismissed the application because the deposited amount remained with the Bank and was not available before the Tribunal, preventing the entertainment of the appeal.

What did the court decide?

Application for waiver of statutory deposit dismissed; Appeal rejected.

Mrs K Letchoumy Kanagarajan versus State Bank of India — Banking and Recovery | DRAT (2023)

¶1

IN THE DEBT RECOVERY APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AT CHENNAI

¶2

IA 59/2023 in IA 135/2023

¶3

¶4

A.IR:219/2023

¶5

Mrs.K.Letchoumy Kanakarajan V/S A.O.,State Bank Of India &Anr

¶6

14/12/2023

¶7

This Application is filed by Petitioner/Appellant to advance the hearing of IA 135/2023 (Waiver) from 03.01.2024.

¶8

Heard both sides.

¶9

Considering the reasons stated in the Affidavit filed in support of Petition, IA 509/2023 is allowed and case is advanced to today.

¶10

As per Order in IA 509/2023, Waiver Application is taken up for hearing.

¶11

This Application is filed seeking waiver of statutory deposit required under Section 18 (1) of the SARFAESI Act, 2002, for entertaining the Appeal.

¶12

Heard both sides.

¶13

Advocate for Petitioner/Appellant submitted that the Petitioner/Appellant deposited entire amount in the Bank, therefore, there is no need to make any deposit, for entertaining the Appeal.

¶14

Advocate for first Respondent Bank represented that the money deposited by Petitioner/Appellant is not accepted by Bank and Demand Drafts (DDs) are lying with Bank, in spite of making a request to Petitioner/Appellant to take them back.

¶15

As per Section 18(1) of SARFAESI Act, 2002, for entertaining the Appeal, it is mandatory for Appellant to deposit 50% of the amount claimed by Secured Creditor or debt determined by DRT, in this Tribunal. This Tribunal is vested with power to reduce it upto 25% by recording reasons. Unless the amount is deposited here before Appellate Tribunal, the Appeal cannot be entertained.

¶16

When it was put to Advocate for Petitioner/Appellant, to get back money from Bank and deposit the same before this Tribunal, he represented that money is already deposited in Bank and necessary orders may be passed.

¶17

As 50% of amount demanded by Secured Creditor is not deposited, the Appeal cannot be entertained. Hence, IA 135/2023 (Waiver) is dismissed. Consequently, Appeal A.IR (SA): 219/2023 is rejected. All pending IAs, if any, stand closed.

¶18

Sd/-

¶19

Chairperson

Mrs K Letchoumy Kanagarajan v. State Bank of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mrs K Letchoumy Kanagarajan v. State Bank of India

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

M/s v S Lad & Sons & 3 Ors. versus Punjab National Bank & 7 Ors.

Sri Periyasamy Prop M/s. Suhajayam Poultry Farm versus Canara Bank

Kailasam P versus Karnataka Bank Limited

M/s Khayati Steel Indutries Pvt. Ltd. versus Ms Vedik Ispat Pvt. Ltd.

Mrs K Letchoumy Kanagarajan versus State Bank of India

Mohanraj versus Jayanthi Anandan