9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (3) TMI 76X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the same footing as a borrower and if he wants to file an appeal, he must comply with the terms of Section 18 of the SARFAESI Act. Also, the High Court has no powers akin to powers vested in this Court under Article 142 of the Constitution. The High Court cannot give directions which are contrary to law. Appeal allowed. - CIVIL APPEAL NO. 1902 OF 2020 (@ SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO.28608 OF 2019), CIVIL APPEAL NO. 1903 OF 2020 (@SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO.1753 OF 2020) - - - Dated:- 2-3-2020 - Deepak Gupta And Aniruddha Bose, JJ. For the Petitioner : Mr. Aditya Gaggar, Adv.Mr. O. P. Gaggar, AOR For the Respondent : Mr. Nikhil Jain, AORMr. Dushyant A. Dave, Sr. Adv.Mr. Aditya Kumar Choudhary, Adv.Mr. Gurm ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... before the High Court and the High Court passed the following order dated 25.11.2019: 2. Relegating the Petitioner to the appellate remedy on account of afore-noted facts and holding that the Petitioner has an efficacious alternate remedy of appeal before the learned DRAT where no pre-deposit is required, the Petition is rejected without making any observation on the merits of the disputes between the parties. 5. It appears that the successful bidders filed review petitions before the High Court praying that the High Court could not have issued directions that no pre-deposit was required. Vide order dated 16.12.2019 the High Court dismissed the review petition and the relevant observations of the High Court are as under: ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... amount offered by the highest bidder is below the value of the property, the DRAT is entitled to entertain the appeal without deposit of any amount. It is submitted that the value of the property is about ₹ 160 crores and even the value as per the circle rate is about ₹ 120 crores, but the same has been sold for a pittance of ₹ 65.52 crores. He also submitted that there is collusion between the employees of the Bank and the successful bidders. 7. We may make it clear that we are not going into the merits of the case in view of the fact that we agree with the High Court that the matter must be decided by the DRAT. The only issue is whether the High Court was right in holding that no pre-deposit was required. We may ref ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... bject to the conditions laid down in the second proviso therein which postulates that no appeal shall be entertained unless the borrower has deposited 50% of the amount of debt due from him as claimed by the secured creditors or determined by the DRT, whichever is less. The third proviso enables the DRAT, for reasons to be recorded in writing, to reduce the amount of deposit to not less than 25%. The following observations of this Court are relevant: 7 Thus, there is an absolute bar to the entertainment of an appeal under Section 18 of the Act unless the condition precedent, as stipulated, is fulfilled. Unless the borrower makes, with the Appellate Tribunal, a pre-deposit of fifty per cent of the debt due from him or determined, an ap ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
