Vinod Dubey vs STANDARD CHARTERED BANK on 5 November 2026

1. The appellants filed SA. bearing no.301/2026 titled as **Vinod Dubey & others V. Standard Chartered Bank** which is stated to be pending before DRT-II, Delhi. The respondent filed an application bearing I.A. no.1198/2026 for seeking appropriate directions to take further steps under SARFAESI Act against the mortgaged property. It is reflecting from the impugned order dated 31.08.2026 that DRT had restrained the respondent from e-auctioning the subject property subject to the condition that the appellants shall deposit Rs.5 lacs on the date of the order and Rs.3.42 lacs within next 15 days and the appellants were also directed to settle the matter with the respondent. DRT ultimately disposed of the I.A. bearing no.1198/2026 with direction that if the appellants fails to settle the matter with the respondent bank within a period of one month, the respondent bank will be free to proceed against the subject property in accordance with the provisions of the SARFAESI Act. The relevant portion of the impugned order dated 31.08.2026 is reproduced as under:-

6. The main contention of the Ld. Counsel of the respondent is that this Tribunal has restrained the respondent from e.auction of the property subject to the condition that the applicant deposit Rs.5 Lacs today and Rs.3.42 Lacs within next 15 days and it was further directed that the applicant will settle the matter with the respondent. It is submitted that the applicant has deposited Rs.5 Lacs but has failed to settle the matter with the respondent bank. It is submitted that the applicant has again given the offer of Rs.8.51 Lacs which is not acceptable to the respondent bank. Therefore, it is submitted that the respondent bank may be permitted to proceed further. On the other hand the Ld. Counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant is ready to settle the matter with the respondent bank. From perusal of the record it is clear that the applicant wanted to settle the matter and therefore, opportunity was given to the applicant to settle the matter subject to the condition that applicant deposit Rs.5 Lacs on the date of passing of the order and Rs.3.42 Lacs within next 15 days and settle the matter. As the matter could not be settled, therefore, the application is disposed of with direction that if the applicant fails to settle the matter with the respondent bank within a period of one month from today, the respondent bank will be free to proceed against the property in accordance with the provisions of the SARFAESI Act. The IA No.1198/2026 is disposed of accordingly.

2. Sh. O.P. Mathur, Advocate for the appellants stated that the appellants have already deposited Rs.8.42 lacs with the respondent and the appellants have paid more installments in comparison with the agreed installments towards discharge of loan liability. He further argued that the alleged demand of the respondent towards outstanding dues is contrary to the law and facts and stated that the sale notice dated 09.10.2026 be set aside.

3. Ms. Reema Khorana and Ms. Akriti Gautam, Advocates for the respondent stated that as of today, without adjustment of Rs.8.42 lacs paid by the appellants, a sum of more than Rs.35 lacs is due against the appellants. The appellants in the appeal have not prayed for stay of the operation of the auction notice dated 09.10.2026 and the sale stands scheduled for 12.11.2026. It is prayed that the present appeal be dismissed.

4. It is reflecting from para 6 of the impugned order dated 31.08.2026 that the appellants were given one month to settle the matter with the respondent but they failed to do so. After considering all facts, the appellants are given another one month from today to settle with the respondent bank. The appellants shall also be at liberty to file appropriate application in case of grievance, if any, against the sale of subject property pursuant to the notice dated 09.10.2026. It is made clear that if the appellants fail to settle the matter within one month, as directed, the respondent will be at liberty to proceed under the SARFAESI Act against the subject property.

5. With the above directions, the appeal is disposed of along with pending applications, if any.

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

-pk\$