Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited vs Narendra Jayantilal Trivedi & Anr.

Court

Supreme Court of India

Date

13 May 2022

Case No.

Civil Appeal No. 4026-4027 of 2022

Result

Disposed

Bench

M.R. Shah, B.V. Nagarathna

Citation

[2022] 19 S.C.R. 360 : 2022 INSC 572

Headnote

Administration of Justice – Abuse of Process of Law – Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993 – Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 – Held: One after another, a number of proceedings were initiated by respondent No.1 by which he has delayed the proceedings initiated by the bank under the SARFAESI Act to recover the amount due and payable since 1986 and has stalled the recovery proceedings – In spite of the strong observations made by the adjudicating authority in the earlier order re-produced by the Single Judge in his judgment and the strong observations made by the Single Judge, the Division Bench was not justified in initially granting an ex-parte ad-interim relief and thereafter, to continue the same on withdrawal of the Letters Patent Appeal – Once the Division Bench did not interfere with the order passed by the Single Judge on merits, thereafter, it was not open for the Division Bench to pass an order permitting the Respondent No. 1 to withdraw the Letters Patent Appeal and also make observations that any of the observations made by the DRT as well as by Single Judge while dismissing the writ petition shall be ignored and/or shall not be taken into consideration – Allowing such a practice would tantamount to not only taking a chance before the court but would be indeed speculative and an abuse of the process of the court – Proceedings before the Court are not for taking the chance by the litigants – Impugned order passed by the Division Bench of the High Court, in so far as in terms of paragraphs 3(ii), 3(iii) and 4, is set aside – Further, the ex-parte interim order granted in the Letters Patent Appeal also stands vacated – Costs of Rs. 1,00,000/- to be deposited by respondent No.1.

The Judgment of the Court was delivered by M. R. SHAH, J. Leave granted. 1. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with impugned order dated 25.01.2022 passed by the Division Bench of the High Court of Gujarat at Ahmedabad and subsequent order dated 04.03.2022, in Letters Patent Appeal No. 75/2022, the original respondent – Bank has preferred the present appeals. 2. The facts leading to the present appeals are as under: 2.1 A loan facility of Rs. 29,50,000/- was earlier extended by State Bank of India and later assigned to the appellant – Bank to a proprietorship firm of respondent No. 1 herei

View Subscription Plans →