ISHTIYAQUE ASLAM KHAN Vs. DCB BANK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Learned Counsel for the parties.

(2.) The Petitioner is aggrieved by an order dtd. 26/6/2025 passed by the Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal, Mumbai (DRAT, Mumbai). By the impugned order the DRAT, Mumbai has directed the Petitioner to deposit 40% of an amount claimed by Respondent No.1/Bank as amount due from the borrowers, i.e., Respondent Nos. 2 and 3, as a precondition for entertaining the Appeal filed by the Petitioner against rejection of interim reliefs by the DRT, Mumbai, in a Securitization Application filed on behalf of the Petitioner.

(3.) The impugned order records that in the event the Petitioner fails to deposit 40% of the amount as directed, the Appeal would stand rejected. Since the Petitioner failed to deposit the amount in terms of the self operating clause, the Appeal itself, as on today, has been rejected.