Sukhwinder Samra vs Cholamandalam Investment and Finance Co Ltd on 15 October 2026

1. Present as under: Mr.Vatsal Gosalia i/b Mr. Chandresh Rao, Counsel for Applicant. Mr. Alok Mishra, Counsel for Respondent No. 1. Mr. Omkar Kanegaonkar, Counsel for Respondent No. 2.

2. This case is taken on praecipe, filed by the Applicant/Borrower for hearing on application for waiver I.A. No. 590/2026 as per 3rd proviso to section 18 of the SARFAESI Act.

3. The Learned Counsel for the Applicant/Borrower would submit that the Securitization Application of the Applicant/Borrower has been dismissed by the DRT-III Mumbai vide its order dated 16.09.2026 and an appeal, still on Diary No. 1751/2026 has been filed by the Applicant/Borrower with the Waiver Application No. 590/2026. The Learned Counsel for Applicant/Borrower would further submit that in the Securitization Application proceedings before DRT-III Mumbai a sum of Rs. 2,90,65,150/- is deposited by the Applicant/Borrower.

4. The Learned Counsel for the Applicant/Borrower would further submit that the prayer in waiver application I.A. No. 590/2026 is to the effect that the Applicant/Borrower be permitted to withdraw the sum of Rs. 2,90,65,150/- together with interest from DRT-III Mumbai and direct the Registrar of the DRT-III Mumbai to release the said amount and, to direct the applicant to deposit the said amount before this Appellate Tribunal towards the deposit required under section 18 of the SARFAESI Act. The Learned Counsel for Applicant/Borrower would further submit that the amount of Rs. 2,90,65,150/-, together with the interest accrued thereon, lying deposited before the Ld. DRT-III, Mumbai, may be permitted to be utilised towards compliance with the requirement of pre-deposit under the second proviso to Section 18 of the SARFAESI Act, 2002.

5. Per Contra, the Learned Counsel for Respondents would submit that the Ld. DRT-III Mumbai vide its order dated 16.09.2026 while rejecting this Securitization Application No. 196/2026 has directed in the operative part that this amount shall be returned to the Applicant. Therefore, no further order is needed to be passed by this Appellate Tribunal. The Counsel for Respondents would further submit that the amount stated above is lying deposited in Ld. DRT-III Mumbai which is a separate forum ; that , therefore, if Applicant want to deposit that amount then, by taking the benefit of the order of return passed by DRT-III Mumbai, can withdraw that amount and make deposit before this Appellate Tribunal in compliance with 2nd proviso of section 18 of the SARFAESI Act. The Learned Counsel for Respondents would further submit that it is a question of law if in appeal any such direction can be made on administration side. They would further submit that Respondent would file detailed reply to this application.

6. At this stage, the Learned Counsel for Applicant/Borrower would submit that in view of the submissions made by the Respondents he may be permitted to withdraw this amount as per the order of Ld. DRT-III Mumbai and to redeposit as per second proviso to section 18 of the SARFAESI Act without prejudice to their rights, claims, contentions and merits of the case.

Not objected to by the Counsel for Respondents. The Applicant/Borrower may do so without any prejudice to their rights, claim, contention and merits of appeal.

7. List the matter on 03.12.2026 for further proceedings. Sd/- Chairperson 15.10.2026

VKC-01