Allowed

Cfm Asset Reconstruction Company Ltd. Authorized Officer v. Ms Durga Textile through Prop Prerna Sudhir Utture and Other

DRAT20 Jan 2026MISC APPEAL/204/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Two-member bench of DRAT, Chennai disallowed two respondents challenges to an order directing them to hand over suit property. The court directed the appellants to vacate possession to the ARC within seven days.

What did the court decide?

Directs the respondents to hand over vacant possession of the suit property to the Appellant ARC within seven days from today.

Cfm Asset Reconstruction Company Ltd. Authorized… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRAT (2026)

¶1

(SITTING AT -CHENNAI) DEBT RECOVERY APPELLATE TRIBUNAL-MUMBAI

¶2

Misc. Appeal No. 204/2025

¶3

Dated: 20.01.2026

¶4

passed the following orders. This Appeal is filed against the order passed by the Learned from taking physical possession. Learned Presiding Officer Presiding Officer, DRT-Pune, in I.A. No.3408/2025 in S.A. SARFAESI Act and the order dated 09.04.2025 passed by No. 698/2025. The said S.A. was filed challenging the 3408/2025 was filed for restraining the Defendant ARC M.A. No. 654/2024. When the said S.A. is pending, I.A. No. the Learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kolhapur in Criminal Demand Notice issued under Section 13 (2) of the

¶5

months. applicants in possession of the same as its Agent for two today and defendant ARC shall immediately put the to the defendant ARC by 3.00 p.m. on 3rd November, 2025 i.e. A. The Applicants shall handover possession of suit property

¶6

same. B. The applicants shall not create third party interest in respect of the suit property till they are in possession of the

¶7

surrender vacant possession of the suit property to the defendant ARC without reference to this Court. OTS or otherwise within this period. In default, shall C. The applicants shall settle the loan account either through

¶8

order from this Court. possession of the same with the help of Police without seeking property to defendant ARC, the defendant ARC may take D. If applicants fail to handover vacant possession of the suit

¶9

E. If applicants settle the loan account within two months, this defendant shall release the suit property to the applicants immediately.

¶10

F. This application is disposed of.

¶11

Aggrieved against this order, this Appeal is filed.

¶12

There was a further direction to the effect that the on 03.11.2025 and the ARC has to'put the applicants immediately on possession as its Agent for two months. over the possession of the suit property to Defendant ARC This order shows that the Applicants were directed to hand

¶13

vacant possession shall be delivered to ARC. they should settle the loan account either through OTS or otherwise within this period. In default, it was directed that Applicants should not create third-party interest, and that

¶14

are also not handing over the possession of the suit property, as ordered by the Learned Presiding Officer, DRToffered any OTS proposal to settle the loan amount. They Pune. Thus, he seeks to pass appropriate orders. Learned Counsel for Petitioner/Appellant submitted that in terms of this order the Respondents/Applicants have not

¶15

settlement. parties as to whether the OTS proposal was made towards on 7.1.2026 that he has to seek instructions from the Learned Counsel for the Respondents/Applicants submitted

¶16

3408/2025. 1Ashe s4rorending the by the Learned Presiding Officer, DRT-Pune in I.A. No. Apart from the legality of the order passed by the Learned Learned Counsel for the Respondents on instruction that no OTS proposal was submitted by the Respondents as ordered possession, t there was a further order to the possession of the suit property to the Appellant ARC and Presiding Officer directing the Respondents to hand over the When the matter is taken up today, it is informed by the asking Appellant ARC to put the Respondents in Respondents that they should settle the loan account suit property to the Appellant ARC. the impugned order is to hand over vacant possession of the On failure to settle a loan account, the consequence as per either through OTS or otherwise within the period of two months. Admittedly, that was not done by the Respondents.

¶17

possession of the suit property in accordance with law Failing which, the Appellant ARC is entitled to take including with the assistance of the concerned Police. Appellant ARC within the period of seven days from today. Accordingly, this Appeal is disposed.All pending I.As. stand over the vacant possession of the suit property to the closed. Parties shall bear their own costs. Therefore, this Tribunal directs the Respondents to hand

¶18

MKS-08

¶19

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

Cfm Asset Reconstruction Company Ltd. Authorized Officer v. Ms Durga Textile through Prop Prerna Sudhir Utture and Other

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Cfm Asset Reconstruction Company Ltd. Authorized Officer v. Ms Durga Textile through Prop Prerna Sudhir Utture and Other

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

Ms Hira Quarry Works versus Bank of Baroda

Shri Premkumar Devandas Kishnani versus Canara Bank

Mamta Ramesh Prajapati versus Bank of India

Trimudra Trade And Holdings Private Limited versus Manishkumar M. Shrimali and Anr.

Indian Bank versus Kanchan Motors HUF

Poornawadi Nagrik Sahakari Bank versus Pragya Enterprises