Mrs. Satya Singh and Anr. v. State Bank of India
Case brief
What is this about?
DrFT heard a regular appeal filed under Section 20 of the RDB Act, 1993. The Court observed the appellant failed to make the mandatory pre-deposit required under Section 21. Consequently, the appeal was not entertained immediately; the appellant was directed to deposit the minimum 25% amount within the next date.
What did the court decide?
Appellant directed to deposit minimum 25% of the debt due by the next date; otherwise, the appeal shall stand dismissed as not entertainable.
What the court decided
Regular Appeal No. 233/2016 Date: 17.01.2023
Mrs. Satya Singh & Anr. Vs. State Bank of India
Present: Shri Alok Rai, counsel for the appellants, Shri Jitendra Sarin, counsel for the respondent-Bank,
Learned counsel for the respondent-bank files reply after serving copy of the same upon the counsel for the appellants, who may file rejoinder by the next date.
Heard the learned counsel for the appellant.
The present appeal has been filed under section 20 of the RDB Act, 1993 against the judgment and decree dated 31.05.2016 passed by the Tribunal below in O.A. No. 129 of 2016, whereby an amount of Rs. 8,52,170.50 along with interest and costs was awarded against the appellants. As per section 21 of the said Act, no appeal shall be entertained by the Appellate Tribunal unless the borrower has deposited with the Appellate Tribunal 50% of the amount of debt so due from him, as determined by the Tribunal under section 19. Further, the second proviso of the said section says that the Appellate Tribunal may, for the reasons to be recorded in writing, reduce the amount to be deposited by such amount which shall not be less than 25% of the amount of such debt so due to be deposited under this section.
In the waiver application, it is stated that the Bank has auctioned the mortgaged property for Rs. 96.66 lacks, but it is averred from the order impugned, the said amount has already been considered in the judgment and decree passed by the Tribunal below.
In the present case, the appellant has not deposited any amount towards minimum deposit of 25% of the amount due, which is mandatory in nature in view of the second proviso of section 21 of the RDB Act.
Issues for consideration
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the regular appeal is maintainable without pre-deposit of 50% or a reduced amount under Section 21 of the RDB Act, 1993.
Whether the mandatory pre-condition of deposit has been fulfilled by the appellant before hearing the appeal.
Parties & counsel
- appellant
Mrs. Satya Singh & Anr.
- respondent
State Bank of India
Coram
Shri Alok Rai
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
All orders in this case
7 orders share this CNR
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court