Disposed

Nishant Vasudev Goyal v. Axis Bank

DRAT8 Apr 2025IA/5/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal held that a pre-deposit under Section 18(1) of the SARFAESI Act, 2002 is mandatory for maintaining an appeal. The Tribunal directed the appellants to deposit Rs. 90,70,205/- in two equal instalments to entertain the appeal against the sale of property recovered by the bank.

What did the court decide?

Directed deposit of Rs. 90,70,205/- in two equal instalments to entertain the appeal; failure to deposit will lead to rejection.

Nishant Vasudev Goyal versus Axis Bank — Specific Performance | DRAT (2025)

¶1

f i

¶2

e j

¶3

’ DEBT RECOVERY APPELLATE TRIBUNAL- .MUMBAI (SITTING AT -CHENNAI)
I.A. No. 05/2025 (WoD) . In
Misc.AppealDy No. 2763/2024

¶4

Dated: 03.04.2025
The matter is takenup for hearing by way of 1.
,a Praecipe, filed by the. Petitioners/Appellants for iseekirig urgent relief.
This .Application, is filed seeking waiver of 2.
statutory deposit required under Section 18 (,1) of
the SARFAESI Act, ’20023 for entertaining the
Appeal-.
Learned 3. Counsel for .Heard
Petitioners/Appellants and V1 Respondent Bank.
Learned Counsel for Petitioners/Appellants 4.
submitted 'that the Petitidriers/.Appeliants filed SA
S5/.2024 challenging the measures taken under
Sections 13 and 14 of the SARFAESI- Act, 2002.
When the SA, was pending, Petitioners/Appellants also sought ah mteriiri stay against the sale of the
property. Learned Presiding Officer passed an

¶5

order on 06.12.2024 stating that no urgency is involved on 06.12.2024, for the reason that, the auction has already taken place in October, 2024; sale was confirmed on deposit of 25%; extension of time to pay the balance amount was considered by the Bank and granted and the allegation of fraud and other grounds will be taken care of at the time' of final arguments. Challenging this order, this Appeal is filed along with Waiver Application. 5. Learned Counsel for Petitioners/Appellants drew my attention to the fact that the Petitioner Mr. Nishant Vasudev Goyal had resigned from the post of Director from M/s. Carpe Heat Transfer Private Limited and that was notified by the Ministry of Corporate Affairs in the proceedings dated 13.06.2016 and there has been a fraud committed by the Bank officials in respect of the Petitioner’s property, and therefore, on a Petition filed under Section 154 of Cr.PC, on the direction of Judicial Magistrate, FIR has been registered against the Bank officials and others.

¶6

6.. Out of two properties belonging to the Petitioners/Appellants, on which security interest was created, one of the properties has already been sold. The Bank is trying to sell the. other property

r I k i

i' L

and trying to' take possession of both the properties, therefore, this Appeal is filed- along with Waiver Application.

¶12

7-. Learned Counsel for 1st Respondent Bank submitted that only one of the two properties has been sold. Sale is confirmed. Therefore, no notice has been issued either for sale of the other property or steps had been taken for. taking possession, so far. 8. Considered the rival submissions and perused the records. . 9, In the light of the submissions made by Learned Counsel appearing for the parties, arid that the pre deposit is mandatory to maintain this • Appeal under Section 18(1) bf the SARFAESI Act, 2002, this Tribunal is of the view that directihg'the . Petitipners/Appellants to deposit '30% of Rs.'3’,02,-34,0.18/-, in two equal instalments, would meet the requirement under Section 18(1) of SARFAESI Act, 2002, for entertaining the Appeal. 10. Admittedlyj 30% of Rs. Rs3,02,34,018 comes to Rs.90,70,205.40p4rounded off to Rs.90,70,205/- y i^yyi/vv^

¶13

¶14

11. Therefore, Petitioners/Appellant Rs.90,70,205/- in two equal instalm instalment of Rs.45,35,105,50p, to b or before 22.04.2025 and second	s shall deposit ents; the first e deposited on instalment of
Rs.45,35,105.50p, to be deposited 06.05.2025.	on or before
12. It is made clear that failure to d	eposit of either
of the instalments. the Appeal	shall stand
such rejected. On making	deposit by
Petitioners/Appellants, Registrar, D is to invest the same in a Nationaliz time to time, till further orders are pa	RAT, Mumbai, ed Bank, from ssed.
Post the case on 08.05.2025, 13. of. In case, any fresh Sale Notice	for compliance or Possession
Notice is issued, it is op	the to en
Petitioners/Appellants to approach for appropriate interim order. PAM CHAIRPERSO (IN-CHAR	this Tribunal N, DRAT, CHENNAI GE, DRAT, MUMBAI)

Nishant Vasudev Goyal v. Axis Bank

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nishant Vasudev Goyal v. Axis Bank

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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Karne Hospital Private Ltd. versus Invent Asset Securitisation and Reconstruction Pvt. Ltd.

Kai Sushilatai Gaikward Bhuuddeshiya Sanstha versus Invent Assets Securitization

Panchmukhi Freight Carrier and Umang J Rathod versus Union Bank of India

Mr Pareshbhai Lavjibhai Patel versus Capri Global Capital Limited

Sachin Dinkar Patil versus M/s. Indian Bank

Reena Subhash Passi versus Unity Small Finance Ltd.