Udai Bir v. Noble Co. Opretive Bank Ltd.

Appeal Dy. No. 124/2022 Date: 01.11.2022

Udai Bir Vs. Noble Co-operative Bank Ltd.

Present: Shri Harsh Chopra, counsel for the appellant, Shri V. K. Dixit, counsel for the respondent-Bank,

Learned counsel for the appellant submits that he does not want to file any rejoinder to the objection filed by the respondent-Bank, which has been filed by the Bank on 31.10.2022. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that he wants to argue the matter on merits.

Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the possession of the secured property was taken in the early morning of Sunday without any prior notice to the appellant. He further submits that the amount as indicated in the demand notice dated 06.12.2017 issued under section 13(2) of the SARFAESI Act is Rs. 36,02,936/-. It is contended that after issuance of the said notice, an amount of Rs. 11.48 lacs was deposited by the appellant and Rs. 18.00 lacs has been deposited before this Tribunal on 19.10.2022, as indicated in the order of this Tribunal dated 19.10.2022. It was contended by the learned counsel for the appellant on that date that the Bank may be directed to provide the statement of account so that the appellant may repay the remaining dues of the bank and the Bank may also be directed to de-seal the property as the entire belongings of the family of the appellant has been locked.

It is further contended that the Bank thereafter auctioned the property for Rs. 28.80 lacs and the Bank itself purchased the same on 01.02.2021. It is thus contended that action of the respondent-Bank in proceedings against the secured asset is totally misconceived, which was under challenge before the Tribunal below by filing the securitization application, which

was rejected only on the ground of delay, against which the present appeal has been filed.