Borrower Can Prefer Appeal To DRT Even If Mortgaged Property Belongs To Guarantor: Chhattisgarh HC [Read Judgment]
8 years ago

Borrower Can Prefer Appeal To DRT Even If Mortgaged Property Belongs To Guarantor: Chhattisgarh HC [Read Judgment]

Live Law  

It is nowhere provided that when secured asset belongs to the guarantor, only the guarantor can prefer an appeal and not the borrower, the court said.The Chhattisgarh High Court, in Manik Mehta vs. UCO Bank, has observed that even when the secured asset belongs to the guarantor, the borrower can also prefer an appeal to the Debt Recovery Tribunal.In the present case, the Debts. It is nowhere provided that when secured asset belongs to the guarantor, only the guarantor can prefer an appeal and not the borrower, the court said. The Chhattisgarh High Court, in Manik Mehta vs. UCO Bank, has observed that even when the secured asset belongs to the guarantor, the borrower can also prefer an appeal to the Debt Recovery Tribunal. In the present case, the Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal has found that under Section 17 of the Act, 2002, any person, aggrieved by any of the measures referred to in sub-section of Section 13 may prefer an appeal to the DRT, however, in the instant case, the property of the guarantor having been auctioned, the borrower is not an aggrieved party.

Appeal Borrower Drt Guarantor Secured Asset Drat Prefer  guarantor  prefer  mortgaged  court  read  tribunal  borrower  hc  recovery  asset  drt  belongs  chhattisgarh  appeal  secured  judgment  property

History of this topic

SARFAESI | DRT Cannot Restore Possession Of Secured Asset To A Person Who Isn't The Borrower Or Possessor : Supreme Court
1 month, 3 weeks ago

SARFAESI | DRT Cannot Restore Possession Of Secured Asset To A Person Who Isn't The Borrower Or Possessor : Supreme Court

Live Law  

The Supreme Court noted that the Debt Recovery Tribunal is not authorized under the SARFAESI Act to "hand over" possession of the secured asset to an individual who was neither the borrower nor the possessor of the asset. It further stated that the DRT lacks the authority to "restore" possession of secured assets to an individual who is neither the …

SARFAESI | Borrower's Right Of Redemption Available Only Till Notice For Sale Of Mortgaged Asset Is Published : Supreme Court
Trending News
2 months, 2 weeks ago

SARFAESI | Borrower's Right Of Redemption Available Only Till Notice For Sale Of Mortgaged Asset Is Published : Supreme Court

Live Law  

The Supreme Court has stated that the right of a borrower to redeem the secured asset can be exercised only till a notice for the sale of the mortgaged property is published in terms of Rule 9 of the Security Interest Rules, 2002. The Court observed that till the 2016 amendment to the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and …

SARFAESI | Borrower's Right Of Redemption Available Only Till Notice For Sale Of Mortgaged Asset Is Published : Supreme Court
Trending News
2 months, 2 weeks ago

SARFAESI | Borrower's Right Of Redemption Available Only Till Notice For Sale Of Mortgaged Asset Is Published : Supreme Court

Live Law  

The Supreme Court has stated that the right of a borrower to redeem the secured asset can be exercised only till a notice for the sale of the mortgaged property is published in terms of Rule 9 of the Security Interest Rules, 2002. The Court observed that till the 2016 amendment to the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and …

DRT issues summons to Wadhawans for recovery of ₹846.63-crore bank loan
7 months, 1 week ago

DRT issues summons to Wadhawans for recovery of ₹846.63-crore bank loan

Hindustan Times  

MUMBAI: The Debt Recovery Tribunal, a quasi-judicial body that helps banks and financial institutions recover loans from customers, has issued a public summons to Housing Development and Infrastructure Ltd promoters Rakeshkumar Wadhawan and his son Sarang, in connection with the proceedings initiated by Bank of India for recovery of an outstanding loan amount of ₹846.63 crore from their group firm, …

Defaulter Can't Initiate Criminal Proceedings Against Creditor/Auction Purchaser Against Auction Held Under SARFAESI Act, Must Go To DRT: Allahabad High Court
11 months ago

Defaulter Can't Initiate Criminal Proceedings Against Creditor/Auction Purchaser Against Auction Held Under SARFAESI Act, Must Go To DRT: Allahabad High Court

Live Law  

While quashing criminal proceedings against officers of M/s Himri Estate Private Limited and Indiabulls Housing Finance Ltd. initiated by Shipra Group, the Allahabad High Court held that defaulter cannot initiate criminal proceedings against creditor/auction purchaser against the auction conducted under the provisions of Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002. Criminal proceedings cannot be …

Borrowers Should Avail Statutory Remedies Under SARFAESI Act Before Invoking Article 226 Against Recovery Proceedings: Delhi High Court
1 year, 7 months ago

Borrowers Should Avail Statutory Remedies Under SARFAESI Act Before Invoking Article 226 Against Recovery Proceedings: Delhi High Court

Live Law  

The Delhi High Court recently observed that the SARFAESI Act provides statutory remedies for borrowers, including the right to appeal, and that the court should not interfere in recovery proceedings unless there is a clear violation of law. Justice Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav reiterated that the borrower will have to wait till measures under Section 13 of the SARFAESI Act for …

[S.14 SARFAESI Act] Jurisdiction Of DM Purely Ministerial In Nature; Not Empowered To Hear Borrower/ Third Parties: Bombay High Court
2 years, 6 months ago

[S.14 SARFAESI Act] Jurisdiction Of DM Purely Ministerial In Nature; Not Empowered To Hear Borrower/ Third Parties: Bombay High Court

Live Law  

Observing that the jurisdiction of the District Magistrate is limited only to assisting secured creditors in taking possession of secured assets under the SARFAESI Act, the Bombay High Court held that the DM isn't empowered to hear the borrower or third parties while deciding application filed by secured creditor. "The jurisdiction of the CMM/DM under Section 14 of the SARFAESI …

Allegations Levelled Against Secured Creditors Can Always Be Examined By DRT Headed By Judicial Officer Of Same Level As A District Judge: Punjab & Haryana High Court
2 years, 7 months ago

Allegations Levelled Against Secured Creditors Can Always Be Examined By DRT Headed By Judicial Officer Of Same Level As A District Judge: Punjab & Haryana High Court

Live Law  

Punjab and Haryana High Court recently held that allegations levelled against the secured creditors can be examined by the DRT and where there is an express bar to the jurisdiction of Civil Court, the same cannot be permitted by alleging fraud played by the secured creditors. The allegations levelled against the secured creditors can always be examined by the DRT …

DRT Cannot Adjudicate Civil Rights Claimed Vis-a-Vis Security Interest Which Are Outside Sec 13/17 SARFAESI : Bombay High Court
3 years, 11 months ago

DRT Cannot Adjudicate Civil Rights Claimed Vis-a-Vis Security Interest Which Are Outside Sec 13/17 SARFAESI : Bombay High Court

Live Law  

A division bench of the Bombay High Court has delivered an elaborate judgment on the issue of the jurisdiction of the civil courts vis-a-vis the Debts Recovery Tribunal with respect to the security interest under the SARFAESI Act.A division bench comprising Justices SB Shurke and Avinash G Gharote was deciding the following question which was referred to in view of …

Pre-Deposit For Filing Appeals Before DRAT Is A Mandatory Requirement: Supreme Court
4 years, 1 month ago

Pre-Deposit For Filing Appeals Before DRAT Is A Mandatory Requirement: Supreme Court

Live Law  

The Supreme Court observed that entire waiver of pre-­deposit for filing appeal before Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal under Section 21 of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, is impermissible.In all cases fifty per cent of the decretal amount i.e. The Supreme Court observed that entire waiver of pre-­deposit for filing appeal before Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal under Section 21 …

Disputes Which Are To Be Adjudicated By DRTs Are Not Arbitrable: Supreme Court Overrules 2012 Delhi HC Judgment
4 years, 3 months ago

Disputes Which Are To Be Adjudicated By DRTs Are Not Arbitrable: Supreme Court Overrules 2012 Delhi HC Judgment

Live Law  

Overruling a Full Bench decision of Delhi High Court, the Supreme Court has observed that the disputes which are to be adjudicated by the Debt Recovery Tribunal under the DRT Act are non-arbitrable.To hold that the claims of banks and financial institutions covered under the DRT Act are arbitrable would deprive and deny these institutions of the specific rights including …

DRAT Cannot Entertain An Appeal U/s 18 SARFAESI Act Without Insisting On Pre- Deposit: SC [Read Judgment]
5 years ago

DRAT Cannot Entertain An Appeal U/s 18 SARFAESI Act Without Insisting On Pre- Deposit: SC [Read Judgment]

Live Law  

The Supreme Court has observed that the Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal cannot entertain an appeal under Section 18 of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, without insisting on pre­-deposit. The bench of Justice Deepak Gupta and Justice Aniruddha Bose set aside the judgment of the Bombay High Court that held that no. The …

Secured Creditor Can File Winding Up Petition Despite Obtaining Recovery Certificate From DRT: SC [Read Judgment]
6 years, 1 month ago

Secured Creditor Can File Winding Up Petition Despite Obtaining Recovery Certificate From DRT: SC [Read Judgment]

Live Law  

The Supreme Court has held that a secured creditor can file a winding up petition even after obtaining a decree from the Debts Recovery Tribunal and a recovery certificate based thereon. The bench comprising Justice Rohinton Fali Nariman and Justice Navin Sinha dismissed appeals against Bombay High Court judgment that had rejected the contention that once a secured creditor has …

Attempt To Take Possession Of Property Which Isn’t Secured Asset Can Be Called In Question In Civil Court: Kerala HC [Read Order]
6 years, 3 months ago

Attempt To Take Possession Of Property Which Isn’t Secured Asset Can Be Called In Question In Civil Court: Kerala HC [Read Order]

Live Law  

‘Attempting to take possession of a property which is not a secured asset under the guise of the SARFAESI Act is certainly a fraudulent action which can be called in question in a civil court.’The High Court of Kerala has held that jurisdiction of the civil court is not barred if the plea is that the plaint schedule property is …

S.7 IBC Application Cannot Be Rejected On Account Of "Usurious Penal Interest" Governed By Usurious Loans Act: NCLAT [Read Judgment]
6 years, 3 months ago

S.7 IBC Application Cannot Be Rejected On Account Of "Usurious Penal Interest" Governed By Usurious Loans Act: NCLAT [Read Judgment]

Live Law  

The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal has held that an application under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 cannot be rejected on the ground of "usurious and extortionate penal interest", which is governed by Usurious Loans Act, 1918.A bench comprising Justice SJ Mukhopadhaya and Justice Bansi Lal Bhat, in Sh. Naveen Luthra v. The National Company Law …

Auction Purchaser Can Challenge Before DRT Action Of Secured Creditor In Forfeiting Deposit Made By It: SC [Read Judgment]
7 years, 3 months ago

Auction Purchaser Can Challenge Before DRT Action Of Secured Creditor In Forfeiting Deposit Made By It: SC [Read Judgment]

Live Law  

Auction purchaser is entitled to challenge the action of the secured creditor before the DRT by filing an application under Section 17 of the SARFAESI Act, the court held.The Supreme Court, in Agarwal Tracom Pvt Ltd Vs Punjab National Bank, has held that an action of secured creditor in forfeiting the deposit made by the auction purchaser is a part …

Appeal Before DRT Maintainable Even If Amount Involved Is Less Than Rs 10 Lakh: SC [Read Judgment]
8 years, 4 months ago

Appeal Before DRT Maintainable Even If Amount Involved Is Less Than Rs 10 Lakh: SC [Read Judgment]

Live Law  

The Supreme Court in State Bank of Patiala vs. Mukesh Jain, has held that the Debt Recovery Tribunal has jurisdiction to entertain an appeal as per Section 17 of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002, even if the amount involved is less than Rs 10 lakh.A bench comprising Justice Anil R Dave …

Appeal Before DRT Maintainable Even If Amount Involved Is Less Than Rs 10 Lakh: SC [Read Judgment]
8 years, 4 months ago

Appeal Before DRT Maintainable Even If Amount Involved Is Less Than Rs 10 Lakh: SC [Read Judgment]

Live Law  

The Supreme Court in State Bank of Patiala vs. Mukesh Jain, has held that the Debt Recovery Tribunal has jurisdiction to entertain an appeal as per Section 17 of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002, even if the amount involved is less than Rs 10 lakh.A bench comprising Justice Anil R Dave …

Partial deposit before DRAT under Section 18 of SARFAESI Act refundable, reiterates SC [Read Judgment]
8 years, 6 months ago

Partial deposit before DRAT under Section 18 of SARFAESI Act refundable, reiterates SC [Read Judgment]

Live Law  

Reiterating the dictum laid down in in Axis bank vs. SBS Organics Private Limited, the Supreme Court in KUMAR ALUMINIUM LTD. VS. ASSET RECONSTRUCTION COMPANY INDIA has set aside a Delhi High Court Judgment which had refused to interfere with DRAT order which turned down the prayer for refund of the amount deposited in compliance of the requirement of the …

Partial Deposit before DRAT is neither a secured asset, nor a secured debt; It is refundable to the appellant after disposal of Appeal: SC [Read Judgment]
8 years, 10 months ago

Partial Deposit before DRAT is neither a secured asset, nor a secured debt; It is refundable to the appellant after disposal of Appeal: SC [Read Judgment]

Live Law  

The Supreme Court in Axis bank vs. SBS Organics Private Limited has held that the partial deposit before the Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal as a pre-condition for considering the appeal on merits in terms of Section 18 of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002, is neither a secured asset, nor a. The …

Discover Related