Sam Family Trust v. Catalyst Trusteeship Limited
Case brief
What is this about?
This Tribunal dismissed an application for stay of impugned orders in a securitization dispute, holding that no interim relief can be granted until the mandatory 50% pre-deposit is made under Section 18(1) of the SARFAESI Act.
What did the court decide?
Application for stay dismissed; stay to be considered only after pre-deposit compliance.
What the court decided
BEFORE THE DEBTS RECOVERY APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, AT: MUMBAI Present: Mr Justice Ashok Menon, Chairperson
I.A. on Diary No. 390/2023 (Stay)
In
Appeal on Diary No.388/2023
Between
SAM Family Trust & Anr. … Appellant/s V/s.
Catalyst Trusteeship Ltd. & Ors. …Respondent/s
Mr Rafeeq Peermohideen along with Mr T. N. Tripathi & Ms. Somya Tripathi, i/b M/s. T. N. Tripathi & Co., Advocate for Appellants.
Mr Tushad Cooper, Senior Counsel along with Mr Sachin Chandarana, Mr Archit Shah & A Mehta, I/b M/s. M. K. Ambalal & Co., Advocate for Respondents Nos. 1 to 3.
-: Order dated: 10 /05/2023:-
This is an application filed by the Appellants in the aforesaid appeal seeking a stay of the impugned order dated 10/03/2003 passed by the Debts Recovery Tribunal, Pune (D.R.T.) in I.A. No. 6 of 2023 in Securitisation Application (S.A.) No. 1 of 2023, declining to grant an interlocutory relief with regard to the secured asset against the Respondents.
Issues for consideration
3 issues framed by the court
Whether an interim stay can be granted on the operation of SARFAESI measures before the mandatory pre-deposit is made.
Whether the granting of time for pre-deposit constitutes a prima facie case sufficient for an interim injunction.
Whether an application for waiver of pre-deposit can be treated as the appeal for purposes of Section 20 of the RDB Act.
Parties & counsel
- appellant
SAM Family Trust
- respondent
Catalyst Trusteeship Ltd.
Coram
Ashok Menon
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
- Court
- DRAT
- Decided on
- · May
- CNR
- 271090003882023
- Topic
- Banking and Recovery
All orders in this case
8 orders share this CNR
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court