Back
D. K. SINGH
Mathew Antony – Appellant
Versus
Oriental Bank Of Commerce – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
D. K. Singh, J.
Heard Mr Dinesh R Shenoy, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Mr V V Sidharthan, learned Senior Advocate; Mr Saji P Joseph and Mr Vipin D G learned Counsel for the respondents.
2. These two OP (DRTs) have been filed by one Dr Mathew Antony arising out of the proceedings under the provisions of the SARFAESI Act and the Rules made thereunder and the Orders passed by the Debts Recovery Tribunal and the Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal.
2.1 In OP(DRT) No.64/2018, the challenge is to Ext.P8 order dated 15.12.2017, whereby the Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal dismissed the appeal on the ground of non-compliance with the directions dated 15.11.2017 for making a pre-deposit of Rs.50 lakhs in two instalments. The Tribunal dismissed the appeal as the petitioner herein and appellant before the Tribunal did not comply with the order of pre-deposit.
2.2 In OP (DRT) No.88/2017, the challenge is to the order dated 12.07.2017 passed by the Debts Recovery Tribunal-2, Ernakulam, and the order dated 12.04.2016 passed by the Recovery Officer in I.A. No.700/2010 in DRC No.1503/OBC/EKM in O.A. No.71/2002. The challenge also concerns the order/certificate issued by the Recovery
The court established that compliance with pre-deposit requirements is mandatory for challenging sales under the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act and related rules.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the right to appeal under Section 30 of the RDDBFI Act is not contingent upon invoking Rules 60 and 61 of the Income Tax Act. Additionally, th....
The judgment emphasizes the duty of the Recovery Officer to accurately specify the amount due in the sale proclamation and the valuable right of the judgment debtor to save his property under Rule 60....
Pre-deposit under Section 18 of the SARFAESI Act is a mandatory requirement for maintaining an appeal before the Appellate Tribunal, and it cannot be completely waived even in the face of financial h....
The obligation to make a pre-deposit under the SARFAESI Act is strictly on the borrower, and amounts paid by others cannot be appropriated towards this requirement unless the borrower accepts the sal....
Procedural compliance in auction sales is mandatory, and non-compliance renders such sales void.
A bona fide purchaser at auction is protected, and a writ petition challenging the confirmation of sale is not maintainable if filed beyond the statutory period.
The court affirmed the validity of a mortgage auction, emphasizing banks' rights over secured properties despite challenges from subsequent purchasers and procedural compliance in auction processes.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
