Partly allowed

Mrs. Amna Amir Dar v. Bank of Maharashtra

DRAT17 Nov 2025IA/712/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal addressed a request for waiver of statutory pre-deposit in an appeal under Section 18(1) of the SARFAESI Act. The Bench declined the waiver, directed the Appellant to deposit forty percent of the debt amount in two instalments, and deferred a scheduled possession date pending compliance.

What did the court decide?

Waiver of pre-deposit rejected; deposit of forty percent of the debt directed in two instalments; possession scheduled on 20.11.2025 deferred pending deposit of first instalment.

Mrs. Amna Amir Dar versus Bank of Maharashtra — Banking and Recovery | DRAT (2025)

¶1

DEBT RECOVERY APPELLATE TRIBUNAL-MUMBAI

¶2

(SITTING AT -CHENNAI)

¶3

I.A. No. 712/2025(WoD) In Misc. Appeal Dy. No. 1797/2025

¶4

Dated: 17.11.2025

¶5

entertaining the Appeal. required under Section 18(1) of the SARFAESI Act, 2002, for The matter is taken up for hearing by way of a Praecipe filed The Application is filed seeking waiver of statutory deposit by the Petitioner/Appellant seeking urgent relief.

¶6

Commissioner with regard to Flat No. 102, 1st Floor Adcon Learned Chief Judicial Magistrate at Esplanade in therefore, this Appeal. S.A. No. 436/2025 challenging the proceedings of the Andheri (West), Mumbai-400 058. When the application is possession notice issued by the Learned Advocate Court Securitisation Application No. 1451/SA/2024 and the possession in I.A. No. 2162/2025. That I.A. was dismissed It is the submission of the Learned Counsel appearing for Iris Building, Opposite Mecca Tower, Gaothan Lane No. 01, by the Learned Presiding Officer, DRT-II, Mumbai and the Petitioner/Appellant that the Petitioner/Appellant filed pending, the Respondent Bank is trying to take possession and therefore he moved the Tribunal for staying taking of

¶7

daughters. When the Bank informed about the availability It is the submission of the Learned Counsel for would have challenged the pending S.A. The the sale of the property and had come to know about it, she Petitioner/Appellant is an illiterate woman and has two Petitioner/Appellant that the Petitioner was not aware of

¶8

of the fund in her accounts, she however without knowing the application for withdrawal, withdrew the amount. The -said background, the Petitioner/Appellant is not able to mobilize fund for pre-deposit and he seeks waiver. impliahaть о

¶9

In reply, Learned Counsel for Respondent Bank submitted 13(2) & 13(4) of the SARFAESI Act by putting her signatures. The claim of the petitioner that proper measures taken under the SARFAESI Act. The sale consideration was ₹47,71,801/-. The balance sale consideration of 5,20,199/- was received by sale as well. Petitioner/Appellant received the notices under Section that there is a delay of 9 days in filing the Appeal. The Petitioner/Appellant is an illiterate woman cannot be entertained. The property was sold after proper service and Petitioner/Appellant. Therefore, she cannot challenge the

¶10

parties with regard to service on non-service of Sale Notice, deposit is mandatory for entertaining the Appeal as per the Petitioner/Appellant to make a pre-deposit of 40% of received by the Petitioner/Appellant, this Tribunal directs withdrawal of the balance sale consideration will be Considered the rival submissions and perused the records. the fact that the property had been sold, third party interest was sold for realising the debt due of *42,51,602/-. Prehas been created and balance sale consideration was also considered in the main Appeal. Admittedly, the property Section 18(1) of the SARFAESI Act, 2002. Thus, considering The submissions of the Learned Counsel appearing for the 42,51,602/-.

¶11

(Rounded off to ₹17,00,641/-) Admittedly, 40% of 42,51,602/- come 17,00,640.80р.

¶12

shall be deposited on or before 19.11.2025 and 2nd in two equal instalments, 1st instalment of ₹08,50,320.50р before 17.12.2025. instalment of 08,50,320.50p shall be deposited on or Therefore, Petitioner/Appellant shall deposit *17,00,641/-

¶13

On deposit of 1st Instalment of 08,50,320.50p on or before 19.11.2025, the possession scheduled on 20.11.2025 to be deferred till the next hearing date.

¶14

accordance with law. Respondent Bank is at liberty to proceed further in If Petitioner/Appellant fails to deposit of 1shInstalment, the

¶15

It is made clear that on failure to deposit of either of the instalments, the Appeal shall stand rejected. On making time to time, till further orders are passed. such deposit by Petitioner/Appellant, Registrar, DRAT, Mumbai is to invest the same in a Nationalized Bank, from

¶16

List the case on 19.12.2025 for reporting compliance.

¶17

MKS-01

¶18

CHAIRPERSON DRAT, CHENNAI (IN-CHARGE, DRAT, MUMBAI)

Mrs. Amna Amir Dar v. Bank of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mrs. Amna Amir Dar v. Bank of Maharashtra

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

Mz Food Products Private Limited versus Bank of Maharashtra

Mrs Shahista Abdul Rauf Shaikh versus Asset Reconstruction Company India Ltd.

Bank of Maharashtra versus Shrinivas Ramdas Dubas and Anr.

Mr Tarang Vijay Ingale versus Idbi Bank

Altafhusain Alihsain Sundarani versus Axis Bank

Prabhatabhai Rice Mill and Ors. versus Icici Bank Limited