Leave granted.
The appellant is aggrieved by the impugned judgment
dated 19.8.2014 passed by the High Court of Delhi in Writ
Petition (Civil) No.3896 of 2013.
As per the impugned judgment, the High Court declined to interfere with the order passed by the Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal, Delhi (for short, the
'DRAT'). The DRAT had turned down the prayer of the
appellant for refund of the amount deposited in
compliance of the requirement of the second proviso to
section 18(1) of the Securitization and Reconstruction of
Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest
Act, 2002, for maintaining an appeal.
This Court has considered a similar issue in the
case of Axis Bank vs. SBS Organics Private Limited &
Anr., in Civil Appeal No.4379 of 2016 and held as under :
“22. The Appeal under section 18 of the Act is
permissible only against the order passed by the
DRT under section 17 of the Act. Under section
17, the scope of enquiry is limited to the steps
taken under section 13(4) against the secured
assets. The partial deposit before the DRAT as a
pre-condition for considering the appeal on
merits in terms of section 18 of the Act, is not
a secured asset. It is not a secured debt either,
since the borrower or the aggrieved person has
not created any security interest on such
pre-deposit in favour of the secured creditor. If
that be so, on disposal of the appeal, either on
merits or on withdrawal, or on being rendered
infructuous, in case, the appellant makes a
prayer for refund of the pre-deposit, the same
has to be allowed and the pre-deposit has to be
returned to the appellant, unless the Appellate
Tribunal, on the request of the secured creditor
but with the consent of the depositors, had
already appropriated the pre-deposit towards the
liability
had adjusted of thethe amountborrower,towardsor withthe thedues,consent,or if
there be any attachment on the pre-deposit in any
proceedings under section 13(10) of the Act read
with Rule 11 of the Security Interest
(Enforcement) Rules, 2002, or if there be any
attachment in any other proceedings known to
law.”
Accordingly, we dispose of this appeal, set aside
the impugned judgment of the High Court as well as the
order of the DRAT impugned before the High Court and
remit the matter to DRAT for consideration afresh.
Liberty is given to all parties to raise all
contentions available to them before the DRAT which may
pass fresh orders in accordance with law.
The parties before this Court shall appear before
the Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal, Delhi,
on 3.10.2016.
AUGUST 23, 2016.