The Appellate Tribunal may reduce the statutory pre-deposit and allow the payment of admitted liabilities in installments to grant interim protection from dispossession, provided the borrowers demonstrate bona fides through partial payments.

1. Mr. Vivek Phadke, Advocate for the Appellants, is present along with the Appellants/Borrowers in person.

2. Despite repeated calls, there is no representation for the Respondent.

3. The Affidavit of Service has been filed. However, none appears on behalf of the Respondent.

4. Heard the Appellants on the waiver application.

5. Learned Counsel for the Appellants/Borrowers submits that on 15.06.2023, the Learned DRT-III, Mumbai, heard the Securitisation Application filed by the Appellants/Borrowers. During the said hearing, the Appellants/Borrowers submitted that, as per their calculation, they were liable to pay only ₹65 lakhs towards the outstanding loan, whereas the Respondent Financial Institution submitted in the DRT-III, Mumbai, that a sum of ₹1,53,28,866/- was outstanding against the Appellants/Borrowers. He further submits that after hearing the parties, the Learned DRT-III, Mumbai, order dated 15.06.2023 directed the Appellants/Borrowers to deposit ₹25 lakhs towards the outstanding loan and granted interim protection from dispossession against the Respondent Financial Institution, while giving liberty to the Appellants/Borrowers to approach the Respondent Financial Institution for negotiation.

6. In the compliance, the Appellants/Borrowers deposited ₹25 lakhs as directed by the Learned DRT-III, Mumbai.

7. However, on the next date in the DRT-III, Mumbai, the Respondent had stated that an amount of ₹1.45 crore was outstanding. Therefore, the Learned DRT-III, Mumbai, observed that it failed to understand how, within four months, the outstanding amount of ₹1.28 crore could increase to ₹1.45 crore despite the deposit of ₹25 lakhs.

8. Learned Counsel for the Appellants/Borrowers would again submit that, notwithstanding the above observation, the Learned DRT-III, Mumbai, instead of extending the interim protection from dispossession, granted liberty to the Respondent Financial Institution to take appropriate measures under the SARFAESI Act , and hence the present Appeal.

9. Learned Counsel for the Appellants/Borrowers would further submit that, as per their calculation, the outstanding amount as on 16.10.2023 was ₹65 lakhs, out of which ₹25 lakhs has already been paid as directed by the Learned DRT.

10. The Appellants/Borrowers further submit that they are ready and willing to pay the remaining amount of ₹40 lakhs to the Respondent Financial Institution to show their bona fides and pray that the statutory pre-deposit be reduced to 25%.

11. Perused the record.

12. The order dated 15.06.2023 passed by the Learned DRT-III, Mumbai, shows that interim protection from dispossession was granted to the Appellants/Borrowers subject to payment of ₹25 lakhs. As per the submissions, the said amount of ₹25 lakhs has already been deposited with the Bank. The amount mentioned in the Demand Notice is ₹86,36,706.49/-. After deducting ₹25 lakhs, the balance amount comes to ₹61,36,706.49/-. Accordingly, the waiver application is allowed, directing the Appellants/Borrowers to deposit 25% of the Demand Notice amount. The Appellants/Borrowers are directed to deposit a lump sum amount of ₹15,50,000/- as pre-deposit and are further directed to pay ₹40 lakhs to the Respondent Financial Institution. The Appellants/Borrowers have submitted a Demand Draft of ₹10 lakhs towards pre-deposit today. They are directed to deposit the balance amount of ₹5,50,000/- on or before 11.03.2026.

13. The Appellants/Borrowers have admitted their liability to pay ₹65 lakhs as on 16.10.2023. As per their submission, they have already