Via Rd 2 v. Andhra Bank
Case brief
What is this about?
The tribunal allowed an application for condonation of delay in filing an appeal but rejected a prayer for waiver of pre-deposit under the SARFAESI Act. Citing Supreme Court precedents, the court held that the deposit must be 50% of the debt including interest and cannot be waived merely due to higher auction proceeds.
What did the court decide?
I.A. No. 435 of 2021 allowed (delay condoned); I.A. No. 436 of 2021 rejected (Appellant directed to deposit 50% of debt).
IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AT KOLKATA
Diary No. 583 of 2021
(Arising out of S.A. No. 100 of 2019 in DRT-2 Hyderabad)
THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SRIVASTAVA CHAIRPERSON
27.02.2023 M/s Via RD 2 represented by Mrs. J. Shailaja
… Appellant
-VsUnion Bank of India (erstwhile Andhra Bank) and ors … Respondent
Mr. Nemani Srinivas, Learned Counsel for Appellant
Ms. Anindita Das, Learned Counsel for Respondent Bank Mr. Subhojit Saha, Learned Counsel for Auction Purchaser
THE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL :
I.A. No. 435 of 2021 an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act for condonation of delay of 10 days in preferring the Appeal. Impugned order was passed on 14th September, 2021 while the Appeal was filed on 28th October, 2021. Learned Counsel for the Appellant submits that the delay is not intentional. Although it is not pleaded but in view of the judgement of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Suo Motu Writ Petition (Civil) No(s) 3/2020 which was the covid period, I find the ground to be sufficient.
Issues for consideration
2 issues framed by the court
Whether an application for waiver of pre-deposit under Section 18(1) of the SARFAESI Act can be allowed when the auction proceeds exceed the claimed debt.
Whether the pre-deposit amount must include interest under Section 2(g) of the SARFAESI Act.
Parties & counsel
- appellant
M/s Via RD 2
- respondent
Union Bank of India
Coram
Anil Kumar Srivastava
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
- Court
- DRAT
- Decided on
- · February
- CNR
- 191090005832021
- Topic
- Arbitration
All orders in this case
6 orders share this CNR
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court