Delhi High Court - Orders
Ambience Towers Pvt Ltd vs Bank Of Maharashtra And Anr on 3 March, 2022
Author: Vipin Sanghi
Bench: Vipin Sanghi, Dinesh Kumar Sharma
$~16.
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ W.P.(C) 15233/2021, CM APPL. 47951/2021, CM APPL. 1320/2022
AMBIENCE TOWERS PVT LTD ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr. Inderbir Alag, Sr. Advocate with
Mr. Annsh Raajan, Mr. Satabdi Desh,
Advocates along with AR of the
Petitioner namely Mr. Gurmeet
Sachdeva and Ms.Kajal.
versus
BANK OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR ..... Respondents
Through: Mr. Nishant Awana and Mr.G. S.
Awana, Advcoates.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIPIN SANGHI
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH KUMAR SHARMA
ORDER
% 03.03.2022
1. This petition was preferred by the petitioner to assail the order dated 28.12.2021 passed by the DRT, Jaipur in case No. TSA No. 63/2021 whereby the DRT had declined the interim stay sought by the petitioner against dispossession by the receiver under SARFEASI Act, 2002.
2. Since there was no presiding officer in DRAT, Delhi, we entertained the present petition.
3. On 10.01.2022, this Court, granted interim protection to the petitioner on the undertaking given by the petitioner that they would deposit with the respondent an amount of Rs.5 crores per month which would not only account for the current, regular instalments which are in the range of Rs.2.5 Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:BHUPINDER SINGH ROHELLA Signing Date:05.03.2022 16:35:08 crores per month, but would also reduce the arrears towards outstanding instalments and interest on account of non payment of the instalments by the petitioner. In terms of the order dated 18.01.2022, the petitioner has deposited two instalments of Rs.5 crores each for the month of January and February, 2022. Since the last date, the Chairperson of DRAT, Delhi has been appointed and the said Appellate Tribunal is therefore functional.
4. Mr. Alag, the senior counsel for the petitioner states that the appeal preferred by the petitioner before the DRAT is listed on 28.03.2022.
5. In these circumstances, we dispose of this petition with liberty to the appellant/petitioner to pursue the said appeal. On the next date, the parties shall not be granted any adjournment by the DRAT. The interim protection granted to the petitioner shall continue, as long as, the application for interim relief is decided by the DRAT, subject to the petitioner continuing to deposit Rs. 5 Crores per month with the respondent.
6. Since the DRT, Delhi has also become functional, we direct to re- transfer of the petitioner securitization application which was numbered as TSA No. 63/21 back to the DRT, Delhi.
7. Mr. Alag, submits that the petitioner wishes to let out the mortgaged asset to be able to generate rent which would enable the petitioner to discharge its liability towards the respondent more efficiently. He submits that the since the proceedings under the SARFAESI Act, 2002 have been undertaken, petitioner cannot let out the premises without the consent of the respondent and the permission of the Court/Tribunal.
8. We permit the petitioner to raise this aspect on the next date of hearing before the DRAT, Delhi. Since mere letting out the property by the petitioner to a tenant is not likely to impair the rights of the Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:BHUPINDER SINGH ROHELLA Signing Date:05.03.2022 16:35:08 mortgager/respondent in any way qua the mortgaged asset and letting out the property would generate more funds which would aid the petitioner to discharge its outstanding liabilities, we hope and expect that the respondent will adopt the constructive and positive approach in this regard before the DRAT, Delhi.
9. The petition stands disposed off.
VIPIN SANGHI, J DINESH KUMAR SHARMA, J MARCH 03, 2022 Pallavi Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:BHUPINDER SINGH ROHELLA Signing Date:05.03.2022 16:35:08