Sukhbeer Singh v. Canara Bank and Ors.

Appeal Dy. No. 516/2022 Date: 03.03.2023

Sukhbeer Singh Vs. Canara Bank & Ors.

Present: Shri Harsh Chopra, counsel for the appellant,

The office report dated 02.03.2023 shows that the respondents no. 2 & 3 have already been served through Dasti, but they have not put in appearance till date. The said report further shows that notice was sent to the Bank through private courier.

Learned counsel for the appellant submits that in the proceedings initiated before the NCLT, the total amount shown to be payable by the appellant is Rs. 10.35 crores and the properties of ex-directors were mortgaged afresh and the guarantees were taken. The amount so due was to be paid in 24 months through respondent no. 3-Apex Hides Pvt. Ltd. It is further contended that the notice, which was given to the appellant by the Bank under section 13(2) of the SARFAESI Act was for Rs. 12.00 crores and odd, but the NCLT has settled the amount of Rs. 10.00 crores, out of which certain amount has been deposited and as per ledger of the Bank, the total amount due against the appellant is Rs. 1.29 crores, therefore, the action of the Bank against the property in question is bad in law. Learned counsel for the appellant also submits that the receiver has issued notice for taking physical possession of one of the secured assets tomorrow i.e. 04.03.2023, therefore, in the facts and circumstances of the present case, the receiver/respondent-Bank may be restrained from taking physical possession of the property in question.

In view of the above, till the next date of listing, the status quo qua the properly in question, as it exists today, shall be

maintained by all the parties concerned. Accordingly, the urgency application being I.A. No. 109/2023 and stay application being I.A. No. 110/2023 stand disposed off.