191090005092023_069a78890d542ba5496dce33a4d4a79b.pdf

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AT KOLKATA
                 Misc. Application Diary  No. 509 of 2023
             (Arising out of S.A. 56 of 2021 in DRT, Cuttack)
THE HON’BLE  MR.  JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SRIVASTAVA
             CHAIRPERSON
06.02.2024
Jagannath Mahaprabhu, Llp 
 
    … Appellant
              -Vs-
M/s. Jain Steel And Power Limited 
& 3 Others          …  Respondents
Mr. Soumalya Ganguly,  Learned 
Counsel for Appellant
Mr. Nimish Mishra with Mr. Abir 
Mondal,  
Learned Counsel for
Respondents No. 1 and 2
Mr. Samriddha Sen with Mr. S.N. 
Patra Bhatta, Learned Counsel for 
Respondents No. 3 and 4
THE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL :
 
Heard the Learned Counsel for the parties and perused the 
record.
Misc. Application Diary No. 509 of 2023 has been filed by the 
Appellant for ensuring compliance of the order dated 30th March, 2023 
passed by this Tribunal, which is as under: 
“Appeal is dismissed. However, appellant would be entitled to 
refund of the 25% of the bid amount deposited by them along with 
interest at the rate of Fixed Deposit prevalent at the relevant time 
from the date HUDCO received the deposit till the date on which offer 
is given by HUDCO to the appellant to take refund of the amount 
deposited by them or if no such offer is made by HUDCO, till the date 
of actual payment. No order as to costs.”
 
In compliance of the order it is submitted that 25% of the bid 
amount deposited is refunded by the opposite party, HUDCO but the
interest portion of the order is not complied.
A prayer is also made for condoning the delay in moving the 
application. 

2
Learned Counsel for opposite party has made two fold 
arguments; firstly that the application is beyond time and further it is 
submitted that the opposite party/HUDCO is directed to make the 
payment of interest portion which is due against him.  But as far as 
other members for consortium is concerned, he is not liable to make 
payment for their share.  
As far as delay is concerned, the Appellant was expecting the 
opposite parties would pay the interest within few days but their 
failure to pay the interest caused the delay in filing the application. I 
find the ground sufficient for condoning the delay. Accordingly delay, if 
any, is hereby condoned.
The judgment dated 30th March, 2023 has specifically directed 
the HUDCO to make the payment, if there is any dispute between 
consortium Banks it can be resolved by them. Since there was a 
direction issued only to HUDCO for compliance of the order and the 
order is not challenged in appeal rather 25% amount deposited has 
already been refunded,  accordingly, the opposite party  No. 3 and 4 
are hereby directed to ensure the compliance of the impugned portion 
of the order dated 30th March, 2023 within a period of 15 days, failing 
which Appellant shall be at liberty to proceed in accordance with law 
under Section 19 (17) of the Recovery of Debts And Bankruptcy Act,
1993.  Application stands disposed of. 
              (Anil Kumar Srivastava,J)
                                Chairperson 
Dated  06th February, 2024
15/ac