Disposed

Ranjan Banerjee and Anr. v. Canara Bank

DRT18 Sept 2023SA/69/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court disposed of an application challenging a sale notice after the bank reported no bidders. It directed the applicant to approach the bank directly for settlement, held the Tribunal incompetent to decide settlement, and deferred the status-quo relief to the main hearing.

What did the court decide?

The IA challenging the sale notice disposed; applicant directed to approach bank for settlement; status-quo application deferred to main hearing.

Ranjan Banerjee and Anr. versus Canara Bank — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2023)

¶1

	Order Sheet( continuation)
Case No. SA/69/202	3 Ranjan Banerjee & Anr. Vs. Canara Bank & Anr	.
Date of Order	Order with signature	Office action with date and dated signature of parties when necessary
18/09/2023 18/tsm	Ld counsel Mr. Souritra Ganguly appears for Sarfaesi applicant. Ld counsel Ms. Aparajit Ghosh along with Ms. Sangeetha Ghosh and Mr. Souvik Ghosh appears for the respondent bank. I.A. 1779 of 2023 arising out of S.A. 69 of 2023 has been filed by the applicant challenging the sale notice dated 14.08.2023. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent Bank on instructions has submitted that sale has failed due to want of bidders. In view of such submission made on behalf of the respondent Bank, sale notice has become infructuous and accordingly, the instant I.A. is disposed of. Sarfaesi applicant has filed another I.A. 1778 of 2023 and has prayed for settlement to the tune of Rs.15.00 lakhs with upfront amount of Rs.3.00 lakh and Rs.4.00 lakhs within 72 hours. Ld counsel for Sarfaesi applicant prays for order of status-quo in this matter which the ld counsel for respondent bank raises strong objection for any order of status-quo. Ld counsel for respondent bank wants to file objection to I.A. 1778 of 2023 which they may file within a period of 7

¶2

days with copy to applicant. Respondent has filed affidavit in opposition to main S.A. and I.A. 1779 of 2023 today. The applicant may file reply/rejoinder to the affidavit in opposition to S.A. within a period of 7 days with copy to respondent. Heard from both sides. Tribunal is not the proper forum to decide the issue of settlement. Applicant may approach the respondent bank for settlement with upfront money and respondent bank may take decision accordingly. Regarding the order of status-quo, the same may be decided at the time of hearing of S.A. on Let the matter be posted for hearing of S.A. on 4.12.2023. (AMBUJA MOHAN DAS) PRESIDING OFFICER DRT-I, KOLKATA

Ranjan Banerjee and Anr. v. Canara Bank

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ranjan Banerjee and Anr. v. Canara Bank

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Smt Anjali Bera versus State Bank of India

Icici Bank Limited versus Sk Abdul Lalan

Icici Bank Limited versus Sutapa Banerjee and Anr.

State Bank of India versus Mr Santosh Kumar Yadav

Smt Shyamali Khan versus Manager, Arcil Arms

Bank of India versus M/S Sri Balaji Forest Products Pvt. Ltd. & Ors.

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Smt Anjali Bera versus State Bank of India

Icici Bank Limited versus Sk Abdul Lalan

Icici Bank Limited versus Sutapa Banerjee and Anr.

State Bank of India versus Mr Santosh Kumar Yadav

Smt Shyamali Khan versus Manager, Arcil Arms

Bank of India versus M/S Sri Balaji Forest Products Pvt. Ltd. &amp; Ors.

Bank of India versus M/S Sri Balaji Forest Products Pvt. Ltd. & Ors.