Dinesh Babulal Sanghavi vs IFCI Venture Capital Funds Ltd & others on 22 October 2026

1. The respondent no. 1 filed O.A. bearing no. 43/2012 titled as **IFCI Venture Private Limited V M/s Varun Industries Limited & others** which was stated to be pending before DRT-II, Delhi. The DRT-II, Delhi vide order dated 29.04.2014 has decided the O.A. and thereafter recovery proceedings were initiated. On 22.05.2015 the Recovery Officer in RC No. 63 of 2014 arising out of O.A. bearing no. 43/2012 passed an attachment order with respect to the subject property stated to have been belonging to the appellant.

2. The respondent no. 1 being aggrieved by the order dated 22.05.2015 passed by the Recovery Officer filed the T.A. bearing No. 48/2022 titled as **IFCI Venture Private Limited V M/s Varun Industries Limited & others**, which was decided vide order dated 30.01.2026. The DRT-II, Delhi vide order dated 30.01.2026 has allowed the T.A. bearing No. 48/2022 and set-aside the order dated 31.03.2021 passed by the Recovery Officer. The Recovery Officer was directed to proceed with the recovery of the dues in accordance with the provisions contains under the RDB Act and Second and Third Schedule of the Income Tax Act.

3. The appellant being aggrieved filed M.A. bearing No. 46/2026 for the recall of the order dated 30.01.2026 on the ground that the opportunity of being heard was not provided to the appellant while passing the order dated 30.01.2026. It is informed that the M.A. bearing No. 46/2026 is still pending for consideration before the DRT-II, Delhi. The appellant also filed I.A. bearing No. 1704/2026 for seeking prayer of stay of the proceedings before the Recovery Officer till the pendency of the M.A. bearing No. 46/2026. The DRT-II, Delhi vide order dated 12.08.2026 has dismissed the I.A. bearing No. 1704/2026. The appellant being aggrieved filed the present appeal.

4. Sh. Sanjiv Kakra, Senior Counsel for the appellant stated that the order dated 30.01.2026 was passed without being given an opportunity given to the appellant to advance the arguments and the M.A. bearing No. 46/2026 was filed to recall the order dated 30.01.2026 which is still pending for consideration before the DRT-II, Delhi. He further stated that the DRT be directed to decide the M.A. bearing No. 46/2026 in a time-bound manner and till then the Recovery Officer may direct not to proceed in respect of the subject property stated to have been belong to the appellant.

5. Sh. Nitin Dahiya, Counsel for the respondent no. 1 stated that the appellant has not appeared before the DRT to advance the arguments on 12.01.2026. Thereafter order dated 30.01.2026 was passed as the appellant himself has preferred not to advance the argument on the issues decided vide order dated 30.01.2026. He further argued that the present appeal be dismissed.

6. The perusal of the record reflects that none was present on behalf of the appellant to advance arguments in T.A. bearing No. 48/2022. The DRT-II, Delhi vide order dated 30.01.2026 has allowed the T.A. bearing No. 48/2022 and directing the Recovery Officer to proceed with the recovery of its dues and the said direction which certainly may affect the valuable rights of the appellant with the subject property. The M.A. bearing No. 46/2026 is still pending for consideration.

7. Accordingly, after considering all facts, the order dated 12.08.2026 is set-aside and the DRT-II, Delhi is directed to decide the M.A. bearing No. 46/2026 after giving an opportunity of being heard to the appellant and till then the recovery proceedings before the Recovery Officer arising out of O.A. bearing No. 43/2012 in respect to the subject property stated to have been belong to the appellant only shall remain stayed. The DRT-II, Delhi is also directed to decide the M.A. bearing No. 46/2026 within a period of two months from the date of receipt of this order. The present appeal is accordingly decided along with the pending applications, if any.

sd -

**(Dr. Justice Sudhir Kumar Jain)** **Chairperson**

-P