Disposed

Mohan Motors Services Private Limited v. Tata Capital Financial Services

DRAT3 Sept 2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This is a miscellaneous appeal under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act, 2002 against an order refusing interim protection. The Appellate Tribunal found that the lower court had not recorded findings on merits and the opposing application remains pending. Consequently, the appeal was disposed of with a direction to the lower court to expedite the hearing and disposal of the pending interim application

What did the court decide?

Appeal disposed of with direction to DRT to decide pending I.A. No. 2896 of 2024 expeditiously after hearing both parties. Appellant granted liberty to seek urgent hearing.

Mohan Motors Services Private Limited versus Tata Capital… — Company and Corporate | DRAT (2024)

¶1

Reportable/ Not Reportable

¶2

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AT KOLKATA

¶3

(Misc. Appeal Dy. No. 782 of 2024)

¶4

(Arising out of S.A. No. 609 of 2024 in DRT—III Kolkata)

¶5

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SRIVASTAVA

¶6

CHAIRPERSON

¶7

Mohan Motor Services Private Limited, having its registered office at 630, Uttarpanchanna Gram, Kolkata – 700100.

¶8

…Appellants

¶9

-Versus-

¶10

Tata Capital Financial Services Limited, Peninsula Business Park, Tower-A, 11^th Floor, Ganpatrao Kadam Marg. Lower Parel, Mumbai -400013 and P.S. Srijan Tech Park, 11^th Floor, Block-DN 52, Sector-5, Salt Lake, Kolkata – 700091.

¶11

Authorised Officer, Tata Capital Financial Services Limited, Peninsula Business Park, Tower-A, 11^th Floor, Ganpatrao Kadam Marg. Lower Parel, Mumbai -400013 P.S. Srijan Tech Park, 11^th Floor, Block-DN 52, Sector-5, Salt Lake, Kolkata – 700091.

¶12

Mohan Motor Sales Private Limited, Dhapa Road, Arupota, Kolkata – 700105.

¶13

Maruti Vanijya Private Limited, 19/1, Andul Road, Shibpore, Howrah – 711107.

¶14

Auto Axis Private Limited, 3^rd Floor, Ramkumar Arcade Chatribari Road, Dist- Kamrup, Guwahati – 781001, Assam.

¶15

… Respondents

¶16

Counsel for the parties

¶17

Mr. Mainak Bose, Learned Counsel with Mr. Rajesh Upadhyay and Mr. Rishabh Karnani, Learned

¶18

¶19

Counsel for the Appellants

¶20

Mr. Avishek Guha,

¶21

Learned Counsel Mr. Kaustav De Sarkar, Learned Counsel for the Respondents

¶22

JUDGMENT : On 3^rd September, 2024

¶23

THE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL :

¶24

Admission

¶25

Heard Learned Counsel for the Appellant and Respondent and perused the record. 2. Instant Appeal has been preferred against a judgment and order dated 05.08.2024 passed by Learned DRT III Kolkata (in S.A. No. 609 of 2024 Mohan Motors Service Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. Vs. Tata Capital Housing Finance Ltd. & Ors). 3. At the very outset, Learned Counsel for the Appellant would submit that Appellant preferred the S.A. before the Learned DRT-3 Kolkata challenging the action of the Respondent undertaken under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act, 2002. It is submitted that the arguments of the Learned Counsel were heard in detail on 05.08.2024 but no interim protection was granted. Learned Counsel for the Respondent also made a submission which could not be concluded and the matter was adjourned to 13.08.2024.

¶26

¶27

but matter is still pending. No interim order is granted. No effective hearing is made after 05.08.2024.

¶28

4. Learned Counsel for the Respondent Financial Institution submits that on 05.08.2024 matter was heard by the Learned DRT but due to paucity of time, arguments of Respondent could not be concluded and he was granted time to file the opposition. Thereafter, matter was fixed twice before the Learned DRT, but no endeavour was made by the Appellants to make any mention for hearing and the matter was adjourned. Further, the matter is fixed on 17.09.2024 before the Learned DRT for hearing. 5. As would appear from the records, a securitization Application under Section 17 of the SARFAESI Act, 2002 was filed on 29.07.2024 which was taken up by the Learned DRT on 05.08.2024. It is not in dispute that action of the secured creditor taken under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act, 2002 are under challenge. Hearing was conducted by the Learned Presiding Officer on I.A. No. 2896 of 2024. Learned Counsel for the SARFAESI Applicant concluded the arguments. But arguments of Learned Counsel for the Respondent Financial Institution could not be concluded. Thereafter, matter was adjourned. Now it is listed on 17.09.2024 before the Learned DRT. No doubt, no interim protection was granted by the Learned DRT but the I.A. No. 2896 of 2024 is still pending. It also appears from the record that when the matter was twice adjourned, no put up application was filed by the Appellants showing the urgency

¶29

¶30

in the matter before the DRT. Had it been so, Appellants could have moved an application before the Ld. DRT for urgent hearing. Learned DRT heard the Appellant’s arguments. But it is settled principles of law that the opportunity of hearing should be granted to both the parties, that principle was followed by the Learned DRT.

¶31

5. In such circumstances, when no finding is recorded by the DRT on merits of the matter and I.A. No. 2896 of 2024 is still pending adjudication, I found it appropriate that the Learned DRT may be directed to decide the I.A. No. 2896 of 2024 in accordance with law. However, liberty may be granted to the Appellants to move a put up application before the DRT. It is expected from the Learned DRT that if any such application is moved, Application and I.A. No. 2896 of 2024 should be disposed of as expeditiously as possible after hearing the Learned Counsel for the parties.

¶32

6. Accordingly, Appeal is liable to disposed of.

¶33

ORDER

¶34

Appeal is disposed of with a direction to the Learned DRT to dispose of the I.A. No. 2896 of 2024 expeditiously. Appellant would be at liberty to move a put up application before the Learned DRT for urgent hearing. If such an application is moved, Learned DRT should dispose of the same as expeditiously as early as possible as per the roster after affording an opportunity of hearing to both the parties.

¶35

No Order as to costs.

¶36

¶37

File be consigned to Record Room.

¶38

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

¶39

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

¶40

Order signed and pronounced by me in the open Court on this the 3^rd day of September, 2024.

¶41

(Anil Kumar Srivastava,J) Chairperson

¶42

Dated: 3^rd September, 2024

¶43

2/tp

Mohan Motors Services Private Limited v. Tata Capital Financial Services

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohan Motors Services Private Limited v. Tata Capital Financial Services

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ms Sai Ram Krishna Motorbikes Pvt. Ltd. versus State Bank of India

Ms Halder Construction and Anr. versus State Bank of India

Indian Bank versus Sri Priyabrata Ghosh

State Bank of India versus Ms Bengal Geo Services

Hdb Financial Services Ltd. versus sree sree srinivas construction

Smt R Rama Devi @ Smt J Rama Devi versus tata capital financial services Ltd.