Madras High CourtWP/35876/2023disposed of

Bhagyanagar Solvent Extraction Private Limited v. The Authorisied Officer

2023-12-21Honourable The Chief Justice,Honourable Mr Justice D.Bharatha Chakravarthy7 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 21.12.2023 CORAM :

THE HON'BLE MR.SANJAY V.GANGAPURWALA, CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY Bhagyanagar Solent Extration Pvt. Ltd.

Rep. by its Authorized Signatory, V.Naveen Corporate Office: No.9, Flat No.702 7th Floor, Manju Block, Chitra Avenue Choolaimedu High Road Chennai - 600 094.

Petitioner Vs.

1. The Authorized Officer Indian Renewable Energy Development Agency Limited (IREDA) Government of India Enterprise Core 4A, East Court, 1st Floor India Habitat Centre, Lodhi Road New Delhi - 110 003.

2. Syed Fahad

3. The Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal Rep. by its Registrar Sasthri Bhavan, Haddows Road Chennai - 600 006.

Respondents

Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a writ of mandamus, directing the third respondent to hear and dispose of the waiver petition, stay petition, and the appeal filed by the petitioner in A.I.R.No.1827 of 2023 challenging the order dated 10.11.2023 passed by the DRT-I, Chennai in S.A.No.6 of 2023 as expeditiously as possible.

For the Petitioner : Mr.N.Ramakrishnan for M/s.ARK Law Associates For the Respondents : Ms.Lilly Francis for M/s.King and Patridge for R1 Mr.Ashwin Shanbhag for R2

ORDER

(Made by the Hon'ble Chief Justice) The petitioner has filed a securitisation application against the sale of the plant and machinery. The plant and machinery was sold for Rs.4.75 cores [Rupees Four Crores Seventy Five Lakhs Only].

2. The Debts Recovery Tribunal held the sale proceedings to be legal and valid, however, permitted the petitioner to redeem the movables upon payment of the entire sale consideration, i.e., Rs.4.75

crores [Rupees Four Crores Seventy Five Lakhs Only] within fifteen days. The petitioner thereafter sought extension of time. The petitioner was granted with extension of fifteen more days, however, the petitioner failed to pay the amount. The petitioner preferred an appeal before the Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the waiver application is pending before the Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal, but the same is not taken up for hearing.

3. We have heard Mr.N.Ramakrishnan, learned counsel appearing for M/s.ARK Law Associates for the petitioner, Ms.Lilly Francis, learned counsel appearing for M/s.King and Patridge for the first respondent and Mr.Ashwin Shanbhag, learned counsel for the second respondent.

4. The Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal is seized with the matter, as such, it would be inappropriate to dilate on the merits of the matter. We would not like to preempt the decision of the Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal.

5. As the Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal has to consider the matter on merits and in the interregnum, the position is required to be maintained till the matter is taken up for hearing by the Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal, we pass the following order: (i) The petitioner shall deposit Rs.2 crores on or before 30.12.2023. Status quo as on today shall be maintained till 04.01.2024 on condition that the petitioner deposits Rs.2 crores as directed on or before 30.12.2023.

(ii) Failure to deposit the amount of Rs.2 crores on or before 30.12.2023 shall result in the axiomatic vacation of the status quo granted. If the amount is deposited as directed, then the Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal shall consider the same as a part of pre-deposit for hearing the appeal. However, the order with regard to the pre-deposit shall be passed by the Presiding Officer, Debt

Recovery Appellate Tribunal. The amount directed to be deposited in the present matter may be adjusted towards the pre-deposit.

(iii) This would be only a part of the said amount. We shall not be understood to have decided the application for pre-deposit.

(iv) The parties may appear before the Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal on 02.01.2024.

6. In light of the above, the writ petition stands disposed of. There will be no order as to costs. Consequently, W.M.P.No.35872 of 2023 is closed.

(S.V.G., CJ.) (D.B.C., J.) 21.12.2023 Index :

Yes/No :

Yes/No drm

2. The Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal Rep. by its Registrar Sasthri Bhavan, Haddows Road Chennai - 600 006.

THE HON'BLE CHIEF JUSTICE AND D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY, J.

(drm) 21.12.2023