Partly allowed

Panchmukhi Freight Carrier and Umang J Rathod v. Union Bank of India

DRAT4 Apr 2025IA/216/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this miscellaneous appeal regarding recovery of dues, the Tribunal addressed the statutory deposit requirement. The Tribunal directed the appellant to make a pre-deposit of 30% in two installments today and within three weeks. Pending compliance, possession of the secured asset was deferred. Failure to deposit would lead to rejection of the appeal.

What did the court decide?

Pre-deposit of 30% of dues (Rs. 22,15,519) directed in two installments; possession deferred subject to payment; appeal rejected if deposit not made within stipulated time.

Panchmukhi Freight Carrier and Umang J Rathod versus Union… — Banking and Recovery | DRAT (2025)

¶1

I I

¶2

DEBTS RECOVERY APPELLATE TRIBUNAL - MUMBAI

¶3

IA 216/2025 (Waiver)

¶4

¶5

DV. NO.509/2025 (MiSC. Appeal)

¶6

Dated : 04.04.2025

¶7

Thi.s matter is taken up through mentioning in the morning.

¶8

This application is filed seeking waiver of statutory deposit under Section 18 of SARFAESI Act, for entertaining the appeal.

¶9

Ld. Counsel for petitioners is present and Ld. Counsel for respondent bank is-present through VC.

¶10

It is the submission of Ld. Counsel for petitioners that petitioners filed SA 331/2024 challenging the demand notice dated 17.11.2014. Ld. Counsel moved for an interim order against <l&Sn#physical possession of the secured asset in furtherance to notice dated 18.03.2025. That prayer was declined and therefore, this, appeal is filed. Ld. Counsel further submitted that possession Is .scheduled to be takentpday at 12.00 noon.

¶11

Ld. Counsel for respondent bank submitted that the loan of Rs.30 Lakhs was availed in the year. 203 2. Due to default in making ioan repayments, the account was classified as noh:perforrning asset on 31.10.2014. A Demand notice dated 17.11.2014, demanding a sum of Rs.31,84z266.76p was issued. As on 30.11.2024, the amount due was Rs.73,851062.780. Earlier the Ld. Presiding Officer, DRT - I, Ahmedabad passed an order on 02.01.2025 directing the petitioners I to deposit 40% of the amount due, as on date, within a period of 7' days from the date of the order, out of which, petitioners were directed to deposit an amount of Rs.10 Lakhs on 03.01.2025 in their loan account. Id. Counsel further submitted that pursuant to this order, .petitioners made a payment of only Rs.10 Lakhs and failed to pay the balance amount.

¶12

Possession is not taken until the time of hearing this appeal at 11.50, A.M.

¶13

VjfYOVv/j

¶14

In the circumstances stated by the Counsel appearing for the parties and the urgency involved, this Tribunal directs the respondent to defer taking possession till 3.00 P.M. Meanwhile, petitioners are directed to make a pre-deposit of 30% of Rs.73,85,062.78p, which comes to Rs.22,15,518.83p, rounded off to Rs.22,15,519/- in two instalments, of which, 1” instalment of Rs.5,00,000/- to be deposited oh or before 2.00 P.M today. On such payment, taking of possession shall be deferred till the next date of hearing. Failing to deposit the said amount before 2.00 P.M would entitle respondent bank to proceed further with taking of possession.

¶15

The 2nd instalment of Rs.17/15,519/- to be deposited within three weeks thereafter, i.e„ on or before 25.04.2025, failing which, this appeal would stand rejected.

¶16

In case pre-deposit is made within the stipulated period, Registry, DRAT, Mumbai is directed to number the appeal, if it is otherwise in order and Registrar, DRAT, Mumbai shall invest the same in a Nationalized Bank for a reasonable period and renew it periodically, till further orders are passed.

¶17

Post the matter. to 29.04.2025 for further proceedings.

¶18

Orders shall be communicated to DRAT, Mumbai through E-mail, with the direction to communicate the orders to the parties through E-mail.

¶19

CHAIRPERSON, ENNAI (IN CHARGE, DRAT, MUMBAI)

¶20

¶21

Panchmukhi Freight Carrier and Umang J Rathod v. Union Bank of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Panchmukhi Freight Carrier and Umang J Rathod v. Union Bank of India

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

Pothuguntla Vishnu Praveen Kumar versus The Catholic Syrian Bank Ltd.

Shivkumar Shankarrao Deshpande versus Indian Bank (Allahabad Bank)

N Kumar Projects and Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. Through Director Nandkumar Harchandani versus Central Bank of India

Jagdishbhai Ghanshyambhai Shah versus The Authorized Officer the Bhagyodaya Co-Op Bank Limited

Ms S K Homes versus the Greater Bombay Cooperative Bank Limited

M/s Primus Realtors Private Limited versus Union Bank of India