Pertaining to drt's
Nazeer Ahmed
(Querist) 20 March 2015
This query is : Resolved
I had filed an application in DRT1 at chennai challenging the possession notice dated 10.10.2013 claiming that symbolic possession has been taken by the ICICI Bank. I as a party in person submitted that vide a letter dated 15.2.2006, ICICI bank addressed a letter to the applicant confirming that the technical and legal details of the project Marine Bay has been cleared by the ICICI bank based on which a loan has been arranged in favour of me. Thereafter, after completion of teh project the ICICI Bank gave certain directions to the builder of the project not to hand over the possession of the flat as the title deed is not given by the applicant.The applicant was paying his monthly EMI's regularly for 36months and there was no default when the bank issued this illegal direction. further it was proved through the document that the ICICI bank was forcing the applicant to sell the property back to the builder.When the bank was not heeding for any settlement the applicant suspended the EMI's by duly informing the bank stating that they are willing to close the loan account for which the bank lend a deaf hearing. The Bank issued a SARFAESI notice under section 13(2) on 2.7.2010 wherein it was informed that the applicants had deposited the title deeds and the security had been created, when certain objection was raised by the applicant on a further letter dated 21.7.2010 a corrigendum was issued by the ICICI bank indicating that they are in possession of the certified copy of the sale deed. Later on the ICICI bank had filed an OA in DRT3 which is pending for disposal. Further in the OA filed by the ICICI bank it was admitted that the ICICI bank are in physical possession of the property since 18.12.2010.The DRT1 on 4.11.2013 was convinced and accordingly the responded ie ICICI bank was directed not to proceed further under the impunged notice dated 10.10.2013 without obtaining a direction from the tribunal. The bank appeared and took time for filling counter and thus they were dilly dallying it till 12.3.2015, when the counsel appearing for the bank informed the court on 12.3.2015 that they will not proceed without the court direction and the Hon'ble president asked the counsel to endorse it which counsel endorsed what he had said to the court. The court pass the orders by allowing my petition and directed the bank to reimburse the fee paid to the tribunal along with the cost of Rs.5000.00 and closed the SA.
1.Now if the Bank did not pay the amount
what are the options i have?
2.Is any way the bank has a chance to go
for appeal?
MANOJ HARIT
(Expert) 21 March 2015
The Bank can file appeal b4 the DRAT.
The Bank will abide by the order of DRT and there is hardly any chance of non payment.
Rajendra K Goyal
(Expert) 21 March 2015
Bank has right to file appeal.
Wait for some time / appeal period for the payment, after it issue legal notice.
ajay sethi
(Expert) 21 March 2015
agree with experts
Dr J C Vashista
(Expert) 22 March 2015
Wait and watch further action taken by the bank and proceed accordingly.
T. Kalaiselvan, Advocate
(Expert) 22 March 2015
The counsel for the bank has already made an endorsement to that effect in the court before the judge which has been recorded, hence there no chances for an appeal from bank side, though you appear as party in person, it is always better to take advise from a local lawyer who is expert in this field, outside the court on further proceedings.
K.K.Ganguly
(Expert) 22 March 2015
Yes. The Bank can file an appeal before the DRAT within 30 days from the date of the order passed by DRT.
Nazeer Ahmed
(Querist) 24 March 2015
Thanks for your advice and guidance. Further,if the bank does not go for an appeal and did not follow the court order, can I proceed against the bank under "CONTEMPT OF COURT", criminally dragging the CEO of the bank in a Magistrate court.
K.K.Ganguly
(Expert) 24 March 2015
1. Your advocate should have requested the DRT not to close the case instantly and fix a time limit for paying the cost and also fix another date to be reported that the Bank has paid the the cost,
2. It is required since in DRT there is no Execution Petition,
3. Send a legal notice to the Bank demanding the payment,
4. If the Bank takes any further SRAFAESI Action, furher apply before the DR and bring to the attension of DRT about non compliance of its earlier order.
Biswanath Roy
(Expert) 26 March 2015
Rightly advised by Learned Expert Mr. K. K. Ganguly. I AGREE WITH HIM.
RAJU O.F.,
(Expert) 29 March 2015
The Order of the Hon'ble DRT-I is given below:
SA 133/2013 12.3.2015
Mr. Md. Nazar Ahmed, 1st Applicant present in person and is representing the 2nd Applicant also. Counsel for the respondent bank present and endorsed in the SA paper book that the bank is not proceeding further under the impugned notice. Since the respondent bank has decided to pursue their rights in the OA, they should have taken this decision before driving the Applicants to come before this Tribunal by paying court fee and incurring other incidental charges. In view of the endorsement made, the Tribunal directs the respondent bank to pay applicant, the court fee paid by the Applicant and also pay an additional Rs. 5000/- towards other costs with a further direction not to debit the charges incurred for publication of possession notice, if any. SA is allowed to that extent.
I hope the bank will comply the DRT Order. In case bank prefer Appeal before DRAT you have to appear and contest, through an expert lawyer. As the OA is pending, in DRT-III, bring these facts before Hon'ble Tribunal-III for further remedy.
Guest
(Expert) 29 March 2015
Well advised.
