9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (9) TMI 966X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that:- Similar issue in the case of Axis Bank vs. SBS Organics Private Limited & Anr. [2016 (4) TMI 917 - SUPREME COURT ] wherein held the Appeal under section 18 of the Act is permissible only against the order passed by the DRT under section 17 of the Act. Under section 17, the scope of enquiry is limited to the steps taken under section 13(4) against the secured assets. The partial deposit befo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ds the dues, or if there be any attachment on the pre-deposit in any proceedings under section 13(10) of the Act read with Rule 11 of the Security Interest (Enforcement) Rules, 2002, or if there be any attachment in any other proceedings known to law. Accordingly, we dispose of this appeal, set aside the impugned judgment of the High Court as well as the order of the DRAT impugned before the Hi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ourt declined to interfere with the order passed by the Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal, Delhi (for short, the 'DRAT'). The DRAT had turned down the prayer of the appellant for refund of the amount deposited in compliance of the requirement of the second proviso to section 18(1) of the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002, fo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ither on merits or on withdrawal, or on being rendered infructuous, in case, the appellant makes a prayer for refund of the pre-deposit, the same has to be allowed and the pre-deposit has to be returned to the appellant, unless the Appellate Tribunal, on the request of the secured creditor but with the consent of the depositors, had already appropriated the pre-deposit towards the liability of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
