Debts Recovery Tribunals and Appellate Tribunals
Ms M M Traders vs I D F C First Bank Ltd on 3 November 2026
**DEBTS RECOVERY APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI**
**(Holding Additional Charge of DRAT, Allahabad)**
**Misc. Application No. 44/2026
Arising out of S.A. No. 298/2025 (DRT, Allahabad)**
**Item No. 03**
**M/s M. M. Traders
V
IDFC First Bank Limited**
**03.11.2026 Hon'ble Dr. Justice Sudhir Kumar Jain**
**Present: Sh. D.N. Awasthi, Advocate for appellant through VC**
**Sh. Bharat Kan, Advocate for respondent through VC**
This matter is taken up through Hybrid hearing.
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
1. S.A. bearing No. 298/2025 stated to be pending before the DRT-Allahabad. Applicant/ appellant filed I.A. bearing No. 160/2026 with the prayer that the contempt of the court proceeding be initiated against the respondents no 3 to 5 as arrayed in the I.A. bearing Diary No. 172/2026. The DRT-Allahabad vide order dated 27.01.2026 has directed to *status quo* be maintained by all the parties concerned qua the property in question as it was exist on 27.01.2026. Thereafter applicant M/s M.M. Traders filed Misc. Application bearing No. 44/2026. This Tribunal vide order dated 20.03.2026 has directed the Managing Director of the respondent bank to appear in person to give explanation about the disobedience of the order dated 20.03.2026.
2. The respondent no.1 IDFC First Bank being aggrieved filed Writ Petition bearing W.P. (C) No. 13254/2026 before the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad. The High Court vide order dated 08.04.2026 has modified the order dated 20.03.2026 to the extent that the requirement of the personal appearance of the Managing Director of the respondent bank i.e. IDFC First Bank was ordered not to be required.
-2-
3. Sh. D.N. Awasthi, Counsel who is appearing for the applicant/ appellant also on specific instruction stated that he shall not be pressing the prayer for contempt application which was accordingly deemed to be withdrawn.
4. Sh. D.N. Awasthi, Counsel for the applicant / appellant stated that the respondent bank be directed to hand over back the possession of the secured asset as the applicant / appellant has already made Rs. 40 lacs to the respondent bank.
5. If the applicant / appellant is seeking the relief of restoration of the possession of the secured asset then the applicant/ appellant shall be at liberty to approach the DRT for appropriate relief by filing the appropriate application. Since, in view of the statement of Sh. D.N. Awasthi made before the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad as detailed herein above, the I.A. bearing No. 160/2026 and Misc. Application bearing No. 44/2026 do not require further adjudication and, accordingly, disposed of.
---
**(Dr. Justice Sudhir Kumar Jain)** **Chairperson** **Addl. Charge, DRAT, Allahabad**
-N