Disposed

Mr Vijay Vasant Prasade and Another v. India Infoline Home Finance Limited

DRAT16 May 2025IA/285/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court, in a sick-listing application, granted a conditional waiver of the statutory deposit required under Section 18(1) of the SARFAESI Act, 2002. It directed the petitioner to deposit two instalments of Rs. 50 Lakhs each by specified dates to defer taking of possession and rejected the appeal if the deposit is not made.

What did the court decide?

Directed to deposit Rs. 1 Cr in two instalments of Rs. 50 Lakhs; possession deferred on compliance; appeal rejected on failure to deposit.

Mr Vijay Vasant Prasade and Another versus India Infoline… — Banking and Recovery | DRAT (2025)

¶1

Datedi' 1.6.05.2025 LA. NO. 285/2025 (WoD) In MisCi Appeal-Dy No. 690/2025- This: Application: is filed seeking waiver of statutory J deposit required xinder Section , 1.8 (l j ^df.the ;SARFAES1.. : Act, 2002, fof entertaining the Appeal. The matter is taken up ,fof hearing by way .of a Praecipe filed by tire .Petitioners/,Appellants for smelting urgent relief. DEBT iRECOVERY APPELLATE TRIBUNAD-MUMBAI. (SITTING AT -CifENNAij
J' The Learned Counsel, fdr. Petitioners/Appellants
• 'submitted' that the Petitioners/Appellants filed S.A. No.
46172023 challenging the Demand Notice dated
04.10.201& and set aside and quash physical;
possession dated 10.08,2023; In the said S.A., the
Petitioners/Appellants .moved an Application in. i.A. No\417/2025 for grant of. stayi Learned Counsel for
Petitioners/ AppeUaiYts isubiriitted that after issuance; of ' .Demand: Notice, the Petitioners/Appellants paid, a sum
of Rs>L45 .Crdfes. The.' Earned Presiding 'Officer : dismissed the said. Application. Therefore, this Appeal J :• ds filed along with Waiver Application. Learned Counsel

¶2

I I I I

¶3

. for Petitioners/Appellants submits that the possession is scheduled on 20.05.2025. Learned Counsel for i81 Respondent Institution • opposes this Application on the ground that as per Demand Notice dated 04.10.2018, debt due is Rs.2,41,99,041/-. Thereafter, the Petitioners /Appellants made payrnent of Rs.1.30 Crores and not Rs. 1.45 Crores. This Application is filed beyond the period of limitation. In the same S.A., against the order passed by the Learned Presiding Officer, DRT-Pune, the Petitioners/Appellants filed an Appeal in Diary No. 64/2024 on the file of the DRAT, Mumbai. They also filed I.A. 26/2024 seeking waiver, wherein the Learned Chairperson directed the Petitioners/Appellants to deposit a sum of Rs. 60 Lakhs, of which, Rs. 10 Lakhs to be deposited on or before 12.03.2024^ and balance of Rs.50 Lakhs to be deposited in two equal instalments on or before 02.04.2024 and 23.04.2024 respectively. The Petitioners/Appellants have not complied with said order. The Petitioners/Appellants deposited only a sum of Rs.40 Lakhs and later the Petitioners/Appellants also withdrew this amount. This Appeal came to be dismissed on 07.05.2024. As of now, the amount due, is Rs.2,05,92,775.85p. In reply to this, Learned Counsel for Petitioners/Appellants submitted that Rs. 15 Lakhs was

¶4

¶5

deposited by order .of pR'T, on iwo-occasions, j,.£. Rs.iO Lakhs on‘04.0.9.2023 and Rs,5 Lakhs1 oh 11; 12.2023. 'Whatever be the case; the amount due as of now, is 'Rs^OS^SjTS.SSp. In the .Said- .cifcurnstah-.CeS; directing the Petitioners/Appellants ‘to deposit? of.Rs.l Gfpre in two equal instalments, would meet the ■requirement under Section 18 (i) of SARPAESl Act, 2002, for entertaining the Appeal. The P4 instalment nf ,Rs.50,0Q,000/- shall be deposited .on' or before i9;05;'2025 and the^ 2** instalment ,Rs.50,00,000/- shall be deposited on. or .'before 16.06.2025; If the -Petitioners/Appellants deposit ■ Rs.50,00,00,0/- on or before' 19.05.2025, taking of h' '' ' -possession shall be .deferred till, the next date of hearing: On failing to deposit-of. T41 instalment Oh or before -19.05:2025, it. is. open, to the. .1* Respondent. ; Ifistittitipn to proceed with- taking possession in accordance -with law. It- is made clear. :that:failtire to deposit of either of ■ ;the;ihstaiments',. the Appeal .shall stand rejected;. On making such, deposit by Petitioners/Appellants, Registrar., PRAT* -Mumbai, is to invest, thfe same in a

¶6

» I i I

¶7

Nationalized Ba	nk, from tiih	e'td time, til!	further orders
afe'passed..
List the	matter on	1^06.20’25,	for, reporting
compliance.
PAM		chairper’s (IN-CHA	o RGE, PGAT; MUMBAI

Mr Vijay Vasant Prasade and Another v. India Infoline Home Finance Limited

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mr Vijay Vasant Prasade and Another v. India Infoline Home Finance Limited

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 Sabina Ajaz Ahmed Khan versus PNB Housing Finance Limited

Vishal Laxmanrao Dandge versus Union Bank of India

Chem Impex Usha Private Limited and Others versus Sammaan Capital Limited and Anr.

Mukhtar Nizamoddin Shaikh versus Union Bank of India

Abdul Rehman Kadhar Basha versus Bank of Baroda

Stone Yuug versus Bank of Baroda