Partly allowed

Ms Luit Commercials v. Punjab National Bank

DRAT2 Mar 2023REGULAR APPEAL/44/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Tribunal disposed of two interim applications. It allowed an application to condone the delay in filing the appeal under the Limitation Act and permitted a waiver from the pre-deposit requirement under the SARFAESI Act since the appellant had deposited over 50% of the dues.

What did the court decide?

Interim applications to condone delay and waive pre-deposit were allowed; main appeal admitted for hearing.

Ms Luit Commercials versus Punjab National Bank — Banking and Recovery | DRAT (2023)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AT KOLKATA

¶2

Appeal Dy No. 39 of 2023

¶3

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SRIVASTAVA CHAIRPERSON

¶4

02.03.2023

¶5

Ms. Luhit Commercials & Anr.

¶6

… Appellant

¶7

-Vs-

¶8

Punjab National Bank & Ors.

¶9

… Respondents Mr. G. K. Singh, ld. Counsel with Mr. S. Mondal and Mr. A. Paswan, ld. Counsel for the appellant.

¶10

Ms. Aparajita Rao, ld counsel with ms. B. Basu, ld. Counsel for the respondent

¶11

THE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL :

¶12

I.A. 29 of 2023 is filed by the appellant u/s 5 of the Limitation Act praying for condoning the delay of 115 days in preferring the appeal. Impugned order was passed on 12.09.2022 while instant appeal was filed on 16.01.2023. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that delay was not intentional, it was occurred due to certain cause which was beyond control of the appellant. Impugned order was passed by learned DRT, Guwahati. After passing of the impugned order there was vacation and in order to get legal advice the matter was filed delayed.

¶13

Learned counsel for the respondent opposes the prayer.

¶14

Having considered submissions made by the parties and perusing records I find that ground taken by the appellant to be sufficient for condoning the delay. Accordingly, I.A. 29 of 2023 is allowed. Delay in preferring the appeal is condoned. Instant I.A. is thus disposed of.

¶15

I.A. 28 of 2023 is filed by the appellant u/s 18(1) of the SARFAESI Act, 2002 praying for waiver from making pre-deposit. As per demand notice issued u/s 13(2) debt due is 92,17,302.30. Learned counsel for the respondent submits that amount due as on date is approximately Rs.41.19 lakhs after adjusting Rs.56.30 lakhs which was deposited by the appellant after issuance of 13(2) notice. As per submission of the learned counsel for the

¶16

respondent, appellant has already deposited approximately more than 50% of the debt due. Accordingly application for waiver from making pre-deposit is allowed. I.A. 28 of 2023 is thus disposed of.

¶17

Appeal is admitted. Regular appeal number be provided by the Registry.

¶18

Respondent shall file opposition within three weeks with advance copy to the appellant who may file rejoinder within two weeks thereafter.

¶19

List on 23.03.2023 for hearing the stay application as well as the appeal.

¶20

(Anil Kumar Srivastava,J) Chairperson

¶21

Dated: 02 March, 2023 10/pkb

Ms Luit Commercials v. Punjab National Bank

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ms Luit Commercials v. Punjab National Bank

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

K Vishnu Murthy versus Central Bank of INdia

Marudhar Tracon P Ltd. versus India Sme Assets Reconstruction Company Ltd.

Ms Amruthaa Agencies versus City Union Bank Limited

Champa Impex Pvt. Ltd. and Ors. versus Karur Vysya Bank

Patibandla Harshini versus Bank Of Baroda and Ors.

Sumanta Sahu versus Indian Bank and Anr.