AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Ashok Menon, Chairperson
The matter is taken up for hearing by way of a praecipe filed by Appellants for seeking urgent relief.
The Appellants are in appeal impugning the order dated 22.02.2024 in M.A. No. 59/2024 in S.A. No. 136/2023 on the files of the Debts Recovery Tribunal-II, Ahmadabad (D.R.T) whereby the Ld. Presiding Officer declined to grant an extension of time to deposit the amount of ₹ 82 lakhs which was undertaken to be paid within a stipulated time. The Appellants could pay only ₹8 lakhs towards that undertaken amount and the balance could not be paid within the time agreed. There was a delay in filing the application which was condoned by the Ld. Presiding Officer, but the application for an extension of time was declined. The Appellants are aggrieved and hence, in appeal.
To entertain the appeal, the Appellants will first have to comply with the mandatory provisions of Sec. 18 (1) of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002. (SARFAESI Act, for short). The amount outstanding as of today is ₹ 82 lakhs, states the Ld. Counsel appearing for the Respondent bank.
The Ld. Counsel appearing for the Appellant submits that two demand drafts totalling ₹ 20 lakhs are being produced today and by way of RTGS another sum of ₹ 20 lakhs has been credited in the name of the Registrar, DRAT. Hence, a total amount of ₹ 40 lakhs has been paid towards pre-deposit.
Given the pre-deposit already made, the Ld. Counsel appearing for the Appellant submits that the appeal may be entertained and the taking over possession of the secured assets on the 25th instant may be deferred.
The Ld. Counsel appearing for the Respondent has vehemently opposed the application stating that the Appellants had undertaken to pay the amount within the stipulated time which they did not abide by. The Ld. Presiding Officer had declined to grant an extension of time because the undertaking was made by the Appellants themselves.
Under the circumstances, it is submitted that the appeal itself has to be dismissed in limini. Given the provisions u/s. 18(1) the appeal has to be entertained in case the Appellants are submitting 50% of the amount of the debt, which is due.
Under the circumstances, I am inclined to entertain the appeal because the amount of ₹ 40 lakhs has already been paid and therefore, the possession intended to be taken on the 25th instant and any further Sarfaesi measures shall stand deferred till further orders. The Appeal shall be taken on file if there are no other defects to be cured.
The amount deposited, shall be invested in term deposit in the name of Registrar, DRAT, Mumbai, with any nationalised bank, initially for 13 months, and thereafter to be renewed periodically.
With these observations, the I.A. is disposed of. The Respondent is at liberty to file a reply in the Appeal with an advance copy to the other side.
Post on 11.03.2024 before Registrar.