Disposed

R P Laser Tech and Ors. v. Indian Bank

DRAT6 May 2025IA/215/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal rejected the application for waiver of pre-deposit. It directed the petitioner to deposit 40% of the outstanding amount (Rs. 16,16,982) in two equal installments by specified dates. The appeal is registered conditionally pending deposit.

What did the court decide?

Direction to deposit Rs. 16,16,982 in two installments; conditional registration of appeal; deferment of possession pending first installment.

R P Laser Tech and Ors. versus Indian Bank — Company and Corporate | DRAT (2025)

¶1

DEBT RECOVERY APPELLATE TRIBUNAL - MUMBAI

¶2

IA215/2025:(WQD) ,lh

¶3

Mtsc. Appeal Dv.N.512/2025

¶4

Dated : 6.5.2025

¶5

Id. Counsel for both sides are present in VC.

¶6

This' application is filed seeking waiver of pre^deposit under Section iB'df SARFAESI Act for ehtertaihihg.the appeal.

¶7

Ld. Counsel for petitioners submitted that petitioners -filed SA 60/2025 before DRT, Ahmedabad challenging the measures taken for sale of the secured: asset and Tor taking possession. Petitioners also moved ah application- for an interim order, it is, submitted that earlier interim order was: granted in favour of the petitioners. By order dated 28.3.2025, Ld. Presiding Officer vacated the^order dated 1.3:2025 which restrained the Bank from taking possession of the secured asset Therefore, this appeal is filed against the ifhpughih'g the'said order.

¶8

Ld. Counsel for petitioners further submitted that petitioners rnade.a payment of 'Rs.28/42,.000/-’aftef-the issuance of demand notice. II. is the submission of Ld. Counsel for petitioners that bank issued.ndtice scheduling to take, possession on 11.5.2025. Therefore; some urgency, is involved in this matter.

¶9

Id. Cduhsel for respondent bank ppposed this waiverapplication on the ground that after the demand notice, symbolic' possession was Taken on 3.6.2023. After failing in earlier sale attempts, sale notice' dated 7.12.2024. -fixing the sale oh 26.12.2024 was issued. It, is further .submitted that sale was successfully conducted on 26.12.2024 for a sbm of-.Ks.82,90;Q00Aiand sale certificate was issued

¶10

...Contd;/-

¶11

on 8.1.2025. It is her further submission that Oh 18.1.2025,■. in the: petition filed under Section 14 of the .SARFAESi Act, Ld. CJM passed on order for taking possession of the property. When possession was scheduled on .6-2.2025, an amendment application was 'filed for ■challenging the order passed by the Ld. CJM and that application was rejected. Therefore, this appeal is filed.

¶12

.Ld., Counsel further submitted that after Issuance of demand notice,, petitioner made a payment of Rs.28,42,00'0/-'and after giving Credit 'to this amount, the arhouht payable is Rs.4,042,456/-. It is further submitted that petitioners undertook, to pay the entire amount by filing a notarized affidavit on 13.2.2025. However, petitioners had not honoured the same.

¶13

I have considered rival submissions and perused the records.

¶14

A perusal of the records shows that demand notice was issued claiming Rs.51,19,830/- from the petitionefs/folldwed by issuance of sale notice dated 7.12.2024 claiming the same amount of Rs.51,19,830/- due: as on 16.3.2023 plus interest, costs, charges and other expenses.

¶15

In the light of-the. submissions made by Ld. Counsel for parties and the amount due as per the submission made by Ld. Counsel for respondent bank is Rs.40,42,456/- this Tribunal directs the petitioner to make a pre-deposit of 40% of Rs.40;42,456/- to meet: the: requirement under Section 18 of the SARFAESI Act for entertaining this appeal.

¶16

Accordingly, petitioners are directed to deposit 40% of Rs.40,42,456/which Comes to Rs.l6;16,982.40p, rounded off to Rs.16,16,982/-- in two equal instalments from today, of which,.the first instalment of

¶17

Contd./-

¶18

Rs.8,Ofc,49.1/-shall be paid on or before 9.5.2025 and'the second ifistalmeht pfRf-BiPS^?!/- shall'be paid fout jveeks thereafter, i.e.,. on or. before.6-6.2025; failing which; appeai would stand rejected. Oh'deposit of lrt instalment of :Rs.8,08,491/- ph dr before 9.5.2025, "taking’of'possession by respondent bank scheduled orrll.S^OZS shall be.deferred’till next‘.date of hearing. Failure to-depositihe first instarmprit by 9.5.2025, respohdentbank w/ill be at liberty to proceed furtherih the manner as knownlo law.

¶19

In case pre-deposit is made within the .stipulated period as mentioned above , Registry is directed to number the Appeal ifIt-is otherwise in; order and Registrar shall invest the same, in -a Nationalized Bank'for.a reasonable'period and rehew it peribdicaliy; till further orders are passed. Rost-the matter on li.6.2025 for further proceedings.CHAIRPERSON, DRAT,.CHENNAI (IN-CHARGEZD,RAT, MUMBAI) SN

¶20

dl' I

¶21

R P Laser Tech and Ors. v. Indian Bank

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

R P Laser Tech and Ors. v. Indian 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

Similar cases

Mrs Kiran Vijay Joshi versus Piramal Capital and Housing Limited

Mr Nilesh Radhakishan Gandhi and Others versus Jijau Commercial Co. Operative Bank Ltd.

Mr Vinod Ghanshyamdas Rohra versus City Union Bank Limited

G P Parsik Bank versus Mrs. Preeti Gautam Patil

Canara Bank versus M/ s. D.P. Industries

Nishant Vasudev Goyal versus Axis Bank