The Supreme Court on Tuesday refused to entertain the Deccan Chronicle Holdings? (DCHL) petition against the Andhra Pradesh High Court that allowed Kotak Mahindra Bank to sell the printing press and its premises if the former failed to clear its dues to the tune of more than R100 crore by February 28, 2014.
With the dismissal of the appeal, other creditors can move similar pleas.
Most of the 28 key lenders to DCHL have already proceeded against it under securitisation laws for enforcing the security interest. The petitions filed by different lenders are at various stages in different forums, including debt recovery tribunals and high courts.
Even the Canara Bank, mandated to conduct a forensic audit of the books of DCHL, is likely to move the court for attachment or sale of properties of the media firm for recovering its dues of R350 crore. Recently, Andhra Bank also took possession of two properties of DCHL worth over R160 crore. The two properties, one each in Bangalore and Chennai, have been attached under sections of the Sarfaesi (Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest) Act.
Earlier this year, the DCHL management had said it owed about R4,000 crore to various banks and financial institutions; most of its dues were short-term loans.
A bench headed by Justice BS Chauhan dismissed the appeal filed by DCHL?s stating that the impugned order not only ?forcloses its right? before the Debt Recovery Tribunal (DRT) but also rendered infructuous the proceedings pending consideration before the DRT.
Senior counsel PS Pathwalia, appearing for DCHL, argued that the DRT had concluded that the contentions raised by the parties need thorough enquiry as the media firm had raised various issues like validity of the amount claimed, discrepancies in the amount claimed in various possession notices issued, wrongful classification of accounts as NPA, etc.
However, senior counsel S Ganesh, appearing for Kotak Mahindra Bank, opposed the SLP saying the HC order was a consent order.