MS SILICON JEWEL INDSTRIES PVT LTD AND OTHERS vs UNION BANK OF INDIA on 6 October 2026

1. Present as under:

Mr. Ritesh Patadia along with Ms. Mumtaz Khan, Counsel for Appellants. Mr. Nainesh Amin, Counsel for Respondent No.1/Bank. Mr. Sidharth Samantaray along with Ms. Chinmayee Ghag, i/b M/s. Zastriya, Counsel for Respondent No.2.

2. It would be pertinent to note that the Hon’ble High Court of Gujarat at Ahmedabad vide its order dated 03.08.2026 passed in R/Special Civil Application No. 10584/2026, has directed this Appellate Tribunal, inter alia, to decide the main Appeal within a period of eight weeks from 14.09.2026 and to decide the various miscellaneous applications on or before 31.08.2026.

This Appellate Tribunal, in compliance with the directions of the Hon’ble High Court, decided all the miscellaneous applications filed by the parties in the present Appeal on 31.08.2026.

3. The Learned Counsel for the Appellants would submit that the Appellants have filed R/Special Civil Application No. 13774/2026 challenging the order dated 31.08.2026 passed by this Appellate Tribunal which is listed for hearing on 08.10.2026 before the Hon’ble High Court of Gujarat.

4. The Learned Counsel for Respondent No.2/Auction Purchaser would also submit that he has filed Writ Petition No. 12258/2026 before the Hon’ble High Court of Bombay challenging the order dated 31.08.2026 passed by this Appellate Tribunal which is listed for hearing on 26.10.2026 before the Hon’ble High Court of Bombay.

5. The Learned Counsel for Respondent No.1/Bank would submit that the Respondent Bank has complied with the operative part of the order dated 31.08.2026 passed by this Appellate Tribunal. However, the direction given to Respondent No.1/Bank in paragraph 18 of the said order could not be complied with as the cost of removing the goods and machinery lying in the property is more than the surplus amount lying with the Bank after the sale of the property.

He would further submit that, for the aforesaid reasons, Respondent No.1/Bank has filed I.A. No. 581/2026 seeking recall and modification of the order dated 31.08.2026.

6. The Learned Counsel for the Appellants would submit that the Appellants are ready to remove the goods and machinery lying in the property, provided Respondent No.1/Bank furnishes the inventory thereof prepared at the time of taking possession of the property, so that the Appellants can tally and verify whether the goods and machinery are the same and whether any loss has been caused.

He would seek an adjournment to file a reply to I.A. No. 581/2026.

7. The Learned Counsel for the Appellants and Respondent No.1/Bank would submit that this Appellate Tribunal may await the judgments to be passed in the respective proceedings pending before the Hon’ble High Court of Gujarat and the Hon’ble High Court of Bombay.

8. The Learned Counsel for Respondent No.2/Auction Purchaser would submit that the issue raised in I.A. No. 581/2026 is between the Appellants and Respondent No.1/Bank. However, he would submit that the final hearing of the Appeal may be awaited till the judgment is delivered by the Hon’ble High Court of Bombay in the writ petition filed by Respondent No.2/Auction Purchaser challenging the order dated 31.08.2026 passed by this Appellate Tribunal.

9. List the case on 29.10.2026 for hearing. Sd/- Chairperson 06.10.2026

Psa-01