Shri Bongoni Srihari v. State Bank of India
Case brief
What is this about?
The Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal rejected the appellant's application for a complete waiver of the pre-deposit required to file an appeal. Relying on the Supreme Court's jurisprudence, the Tribunal held that a borrower cannot use sale proceeds to satisfy the deposit obligation while simultaneously challenging the sale.
What did the court decide?
Application for waiver dismissed; Appellant directed to deposit 50% of the claimed debt (interest included) within 8 weeks, failing which the appeal will be dismissed.
IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AT KOLKATA
(Dy. No. 19 of 2022)
(Arising out of S.A. No.112 of 2021 in DRT-II, Hyderabad)
THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SRIVASTAVA
CHAIRPERSON
16.02.2023 B.Srihari … Appellant -VsState Bank of India & ors. ….Respondents Mr. Shreyash Basu Dasgupta, Learned Counsel for the Appellant. Ms. Mekhala Kanji, Learned Counsel for the Respondent. Mr. Gaurav Singh, Learned Counsel for the Respondent No. 3.
THE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL :
Heard the Learned Counsel for the parties and perused the documents. I.A. No. 73 of 2022 application for waiver from making pre deposit under Section 18(1) of the SARFAESI Act, 2002. Learned Counsel for the Appellant submits that the secured assets have already been sold and sale proceeds have been deposited with the Bank.
Submissions made by the Learned Counsel for the Appellant could not be accepted in view of the law laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in Civil Appeal No. 8969 of 2022
2
Issues for consideration
2 issues framed by the court
Whether a borrower challenging an auction sale can rely on sale proceeds to claim a waiver of the pre-deposit requirement under the SARFAESI Act.
Whether the DRAT has jurisdiction to entertain an appeal without the mandatory pre-deposit of 50% of the debt inclusive of interest.
Parties & counsel
- appellant
B. Srihari
- respondent
State Bank of India
Coram
Anil Kumar Srivastava
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
All orders in this case
12 orders share this CNR
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court