(52)IAL-30565-3302-30569.doc

rajshree

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION

INTERIM APPLICATION (L) NO.30565 OF 2022

IN

COMMERCIAL ARBITRATION PETITION NO.64 OF 2021

IDFC First Bank

]

..

Intervener/Secured Creditors

IN THE MATTER OF

Tata Capital Financial Services Ltd.

]

..

Applicant

vs.

Natraj Construction Co. & Ors.

]

..

Respondents

AND

D.N. Kher

]

..

Court proposed

WITH

INTERIM APPLICATION NO.3302 OF 2022

IN

COMMERCIAL ARBITRATION PETITION NO.103 OF 2021

IDFC First Bank

]

..

Intervener/Secured Creditors

IN THE MATTER OF

Tata Capital Financial Services Ltd.

]

..

Applicant

vs.

Natraj Construction Co. & Ors.

]

..

Respondents

AND

D.N. Kher

]

..

Court proposed

WITH

INTERIM APPLICATION (L) NO.30569 OF 2022

IN

COMMERCIAL ARBITRATION PETITION NO.99 OF 2021

1/4

(52)IAL-30565-3302-30569.doc

IDFC First Bank

]

..

Intervener/Secured Creditors

IN THE MATTER OF

Tata Capital Financial Services Ltd.

]

..

Applicant

vs.

Natraj Construction Co. & Ors.

]

..

Respondents

AND

D.N. Kher

]

..

Court proposed

Mr.Ranjeev Carvalho a/w Kaustubh Gupte, Poonam Ashar i/b RMS

Law Firm for the Applicant.

Mr.Aseem Naphade i/b A.P. Singh for Respondent Nos.1 to 3.

Mr.Nikhil Mehta i/b KMC Legal for Petitioner.

Ms.Rekha Rane, IInd Assistant to Court Receiver present.

CORAM :

BHARATI DANGRE, J

DATE :

19^th DECEMBER, 2022.

P.C.

1]

By order dated 17.07.2021 passed in Commercial Arbitration

Petition No.64/2021, at the instance of the Petitioner -Tata Capital

Financial Services Ltd. in three Commercial Arbitration Petitions, the

Court Receiver, High Court, Bombay, was appointed to take physical

possession of the hypothicated goods and prayer clause (d) was also

granted, which had sought directions to the Respondent to hand over

physical, peaceful and vacant possession of the properties described in

Exhibit B.

The Court Receiver was also directed to hand over the properties

to the Petitioner with liberty, to dispose of the same by private treaty

and to adjust the sale proceeds towards the outstanding dues, due and

2/4

(52)IAL-30565-3302-30569.doc

payable to it from the Respondent. Exhibit B covered 3 properties

belonging to Respondent No.1 and Respondent Nos.2 and 3, the co-

borrowers, respectively.

The said order was stand complied by the Court Receiver.

2]

During interagnum, the IDFC First Bank Limited took out

Intervention Applications, on the premise that it being the secured

creditor and having initiated action under The Securitisation and

Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security

Interest Act, 2002, against the Respondent and they having secured

an order under Section 14, as against second property mentioned in

Exhibit B being Bungalow No.14, “Aditya Bungalow”, Mouje Thaltej,

Taluka Ghatlodia, District-Ahmedabad, Gujarat, which was subjected to

attachment under the distinct order of the Collector..

3]

IDFC First Bank, by the Interim Applications prayed that the

Court Receiver shall be restrained from attaching the said property in

the wake of valid subsisting mortgage already created in its favour and

as a secured creditor, having a valid charge over the said property.

The Intervenor/Applicant, therefore, sought directions to be

issued to the Court Receiver to lift the attachment and restrain Tata

Capital Financial Services Ltd from creating any third party rights,

against the said property.

4]

With this prevailing scenario, on 23.11.2022, the estimated value

of the property was sought for so as to determine the prospects of

satisfying claim of the secured creditor as well as Tata Capital

Financial Services Ltd. On 06.12.2022, a valuation report was

produced by the IDFC First Bank.

3/4

(52)IAL-30565-3302-30569.doc

5]

The learned counsel Mr.Nikhil Mehta representing the

Petitioners had sought time to assess the valuation of the property

from its own valuer so as to make appropriat