SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(RAJ) 903

HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN (JODHPUR BENCH)
MR. JUSTICE VINIT KUMAR MATHUR, J
M/S JAI BHERUNATH VEGETABLE COMPANY – Appellant
Versus
CENTRAL BANK OF INDIA – Respondent
CW / 20698 / 2024



Advocates:
Mr. Kapil Kumar Kumawat, Mr. Lalit Parihar

The court upheld the petitioner's commitment to deposit a substantial amount, establishing conditions for the abeyance of recovery proceedings by the bank.

Headnote:(A) The Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 - The petition sought to quash an order from the Debts Recovery Tribunal and requested directions regarding interim relief and possession of property. (Paras 3, 4, 6)

(B) Consent and commitment - The petitioner agreed to deposit Rs.60,00,000/- in installments, with conditions set for abeyance of recovery proceedings. (Paras 4, 5)

(C) Enforcement of commitments - The court clarified that failure to adhere to the payment schedule would allow the bank to proceed with recovery. (Paras 6, 7)

Facts of the case:
The petitioner filed a writ petition against an order from the Debts Recovery Tribunal concerning a securitization application involving a bank and a vegetable company. The petitioner expressed willingness to deposit a substantial amount to halt recovery actions.

Findings of Court:
The court disposed of the writ petition with specific payment directives and conditions regarding the bank's recovery actions.

Issues: The main issues included the validity of the tribunal's order and the conditions for interim relief.

Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the importance of the petitioner's commitment to deposit the agreed amount, establishing a framework for the bank's recovery actions based on compliance.

Result: Writ petition disposed of with directions for payment.

Order :

1. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the present writ petition is taken up today itself for final disposal.

2. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

3. The present writ petition has been filed with the following prayers :-

“a) The impugned order dated 08.11.2024 Annx.No.2 passed by the Presiding officer, Debts Recovery Tribunal-II Delhi Additional Charge, Debts Recovery Tribunal, Jaipur Sh. Sushil Kumar Rastogi in The Securitisation Application No. 573/2024 titled M/S Jai Bherunath Vegetable Company Vs.Central Bank of India may kindly be quashed and set aside.

b) The Ld.DRT, Jaipur may kindly be directed to decide the interim relief under The Securitisation Application No. 573/2024 titled M/S Jai Bherunath Vegetable Company Vs. Central Bank of India afresh as per the material available on record and question of law involved therien, pending adjudication thereat;

c) The Respondent Bank may kindly be directed not to take the physical possession of the subject immovable property and further not to issue any auction notice with respect to the subject immovable property till interim relief is decided thereat;”

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner, instead of joining the issue on merit on instructions submits that he is ready and willing to deposit an amount of Rs.60,00,000/- (Rupees : Sixty Lacs Only) on or before 31.03.2025. He further submits that out of the aforesaid amount of Rs.60,00,000/- (Rupees : Sixty Lacs), he shall deposit Rs.15,00,000/- (Rupees : Fifteen Lacs Only) on or before 28.02.2025 and the remaining amount i.e. Rs.45,00,000/- (Rupees : Forty Five Lacs Only) shall be deposited by him on or before 31.03.2025. Further, it is submitted that after depositing the aforesaid amount of Rs.60,00,000/- (Rupees : Sixty Lacs Only) uptil 31.03.2025, he shall deposit a sum of Rs.10,00,000/-(Rupees : Ten Lacs Only) per month thereafter.

5. On the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the respondent Bank, on instructions, submits that if the petitioner deposits the said amount within the stipulated time, the recovery proceedings against the petitioner shall be kept in abeyance and if the petitioner fails to obey the commitment made here-in-above, liberty may be granted to the respondent-Bank to recover the same in accordance with law.

6. In view of the submissions made before this Court, the present writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the petitioner to deposit an amount of Rs.60,00,000/- (Rupees : Sixty Lacs Only) on or before 31.03.2025. It is further directed that out of the aforesaid amount of Rs.60,00,000/- (Rupees : Sixty Lacs Only), he shall deposit Rs.15,00,000/- (Rupees : Fifteen Lacs Only) on or before 28.02.2025 and the remaining amount i.e. Rs.45,00,000/- (Rupees : Forty Five Lacs Only) shall be deposited by him on or before 31.03.2025. Further, it is ordered that after depositing the aforesaid amount of Rs.60,00,000/- (Rupees : Sixty Lacs Only) uptil 31.03.2025, he shall deposit a sum of Rs.10,00,000/- (Rupees : Ten Lacs Only) per month thereafter till the entire amount due to the petitioner is not repaid.

7. It is made clear that if the commitment made by the petitioner here-in-above is not obeyed and adhered to, the respondent-bank will be free to recover the amount due from the stage when this petition has been disposed of.

8. The stay application and other pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top