Allowed

Union Bank of India v. Whitemen Constructions Private lIMITED

DRAT18 Apr 2024MISC APPEAL/36/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal held that an interim order passed solely on a party's statement regarding payment undertakings, without prior notice or opportunity of hearing to the other party, is legally unsustainable. Consequently, the impugned order was vacated, and the matter was remanded for fresh consideration after proper notice.

What did the court decide?

The impugned order dated 21.02.2023 passed by the Learned DRT Visakhapatnam is set aside, and the matter is remanded for decision after affording an opportunity of hearing.

Union Bank of India versus Whitemen Constructions Private… — Banking and Recovery | DRAT (2024)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AT KOLKATA

¶2

(Misc. Appeal No. 36 of 2023) (Arising out of I.A. No. 171 of 2023 in S.A. No.59 of 2023 in DRTVisakhapatnam)

¶3

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SRIVASTAVA

¶4

CHAIRPERSON

¶5

Union Bank of India Maharanipeta Branch, represented by its Chief Manager.

¶6

Authorized Officer, Union Bank of India, Maharanipeta Branch, Visakhapatnam

¶7

…Appellants

¶8

-Versus-

¶9

M/s Whitemen Constructions Private Limited, Corporate Office, having office at D.No. 9-17-27/1, Flat No. 201, CBM Compound, VIP Road, Visakhapatnam, Pin -530003, represented by its Managing Director, Gudivada Sivaram Prasad, son of G. Appa Rao, aged 52 years, residing at Flat No. 8C, Ocean Apartments, Pedawaltair, Visakhapatnam, PIN -530017.

¶10

… Respondents

¶11

Counsel for the parties		Mr. Dipanjan Dutta, Learned Counsel Mr. Subhojit Chowdhury, Learned Counsel for the Appellant
		None for the Respondent
JUDGMENT	: On	18^thApril, 2024

¶12

THE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL :

¶13

Heard the Learned Counsel for the Appellant and perused the record. Despite service none is appearing for the Respondents. 2. Instant Appeal has been preferred against an order dated 21.02.2023 passed by the Learned Debts Recovery

¶14

¶15

Tribunal Visakhapatnam in I.A No. 171 of 2023 arising out of SA No. 59 of 2023.

¶16

3. Learned Counsel for the Appellant would submit that the impugned order was passed at the very first day of the filing of the SARFAESI Application. No opportunity was granted to the Appellants herein to file any opposition. Further, the impugned order was passed merely on the basis of a statement made by the Appellant, that too for payment of certain amount in future in equal instalments.

¶17

4. A bare perusal of the impugned order would reflect that the Respondents herein after filing the Application under Section 17 of the SARFAESI Act undertakes to make payment of 15% of the notice amount within 20 days and thereafter 10% within further 20 days from the date of first payment and thereafter remaining amount shall be paid within six equal monthly instalments. On the basis of the undertaking, Learned DRT passed the impugned order.

¶18

5. It is settled legal proposition of law that an order against a party can only be passed after affording an opportunity of hearing. Opportunity of hearing means that notices be issued to the other parties and only then any order should be passed. Further, in the present case merely on the basis of a statement made by the SARFAESI Applicant interim orders were passed which could not stand the test of law. 6. Accordingly, impugned order cannot be sustained and is liable to be vacated. Appeal deserves to be allowed.

¶19

¶20

ORDER

¶21

Appeal is allowed. Impugned order dated 21.02.2023 passed by the Learned DRT Visakhapatnam in SA No. 59 of 2023 is set aside. Learned DRT is hereby directed to decide the matter after affording an opportunity of hearing to the parties in accordance with law.

¶22

No Order as to costs.

¶23

File be consigned to Record Room.

¶24

Copy of the order be supplied to Appellant and the Respondents and a copy be also forwarded to the concerned DRT.

¶25

Copy of the Judgment/ Final Order be uploaded in the Tribunal’s Website.

¶26

Order pronounced by me in the open Court on 18^th April, 2024.

¶27

(Anil Kumar Srivastava,J) Chairperson

¶28

Dated: 18^th April, 2024 tp/8

Union Bank of India v. Whitemen Constructions Private lIMITED

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Union Bank of India v. Whitemen Constructions Private lIMITED

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

A.B. Bank Limited versus Indian Bank and Ors.

Indian Bank versus Smt Dipsikha Bhattacharjee and Ors.

National Bank Ltd. versus Indian Bank & Ors.

Nandarani Naskar versus Fullerton India Home Finance Co. Ltt

Rushnlo Kemp versus Vijaya Bank

A.O. Canara Bank versus Madapalli Pradeep Verma and Ors.