Disposed

Bank of Baroda v. Ms Aaranya Foods Pvt. Ltd. and Others

DRT29 Mar 2023MA/38/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a miscellaneous application seeking deletion of a deceased debtor from recovery proceedings, the Court held that amending the certificate is unnecessary. The applicant is directed to approach the Recovery Officer to continue proceedings against legal representatives under Rule 85 of the Income Tax Act.

What did the court decide?

The applicant is directed to move a fresh application before the Recovery Officer to proceed with recovery against legal representatives; no deletion or correction of the certificate is required.

Bank of Baroda versus Ms Aaranya Foods Pvt. Ltd. and Others — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2023)

¶1

Date of order or proceediI!_g

¶2

Office action taken with data

¶3

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL, PATNA Order with the Signature of the Court
MA 38 of2023

29.03.2023

Heard Ld. counsel for the applicant. It has been submitted on behalf of the applicant that the substitution petition was filed before the Recovery Officer in RP case no. 133/2013 on the account of death of certificate debtor no. 11 namely Late Vijay Prakash Sharma with the prayer to delete the name of aforesaid certificate debtor from the recovery proceedings and in his place the name of the legal heirs mentioned at the paragraph 5 of the application be substituted. Though it has been wrongly mentioned as para 4 of the petition. Ld. counsel for the applicant further submits that the aforesaid application was rejected by the Ld. Recovery Officer vide order dated 15.9.2022 with the observation that in view of the U/S26(2) of the RDB Act the certificate cannot be withdraw or corrected by the Recovery Officer. Any correction has to be made by the Presiding Officer.

¶9

On perusal of the records, it is clear that prayer has been made in the petition to delete the name of the deceased certificate debtor from the Recovery Proceedings. The word Recovery Proceeding is the vague term. The Specific document has not been referred wherein the substitution was requested. The correct procedure could have been that the request for continuing or proceed the recovery against the legal representatives of the deceased after giving information regarding the death of the certificate debtor and there is no legal requirement to get the Recover Certificate corrected or amended in any manner. Rule 85 of second schedule of Income Tax Act,1961 empower, executing court to continue with the recovery proceedings against the legal representatives of the defaulter.

¶10

In such circumstances, the applicant is directed to move a fresh application before the Recovery Officer to proceed! continue the Recovery Proceedings against the legal representatives and no prayer for deletion or correction or amending the recovery certificate is required. The Recovery Officer shall pass suitable order under Rules 85 of Second Schedule of Income Tax Act. Accordingly the Misc. application is disposed of.

¶11

Patna

¶12

Order to be uploaded on the Tribunal's website.

¶13

(\I '1? "V./A.\ fl:J ..fJ (KaUShale~ - adav) Presiding Officer

¶14

Bank of Baroda v. Ms Aaranya Foods Pvt. Ltd. and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bank of Baroda v. Ms Aaranya Foods Pvt. Ltd. and Others

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

V.N.Vanithamani versus Federal Bank

City Union Bank Limited versus Smt. Cheela Sashikala

City Union Bank Limited, versus Smt.Chella Sashikala

Upper India Traing Co. India Pvt. Ltd. versus M/S. Fullerton India Credit Co. Ltd.

Smt Vidya Maurya versus Additional District Magistrate

Punjab National Bank versus Mrs Sukhwinder Kaur @ Sukhvinder Kaur