Partly allowed

LIC Housing Finance Ltd. v. Venkata Narayana Tummalapenta

DRAT15 Apr 2024REGULAR APPEAL/17/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The DRAT allowed an application under Order 41 Rule 27 CPC to file additional evidence regarding service of notices under the SARFAESI Act. It allowed the appeal against the lower DRT's order, set aside the impugned judgment, and remanded the matter for fresh disposal after hearing both sides considering the new documents.

What did the court decide?

Application for additional evidence allowed. Appeal allowed. Impugned order set aside. Matter remanded to lower DRT for fresh hearing.

LIC Housing Finance Ltd. versus Venkata Narayana… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRAT (2024)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AT KOLKATA

¶2

(Appeal No. 17 of 2024)

¶3

(Arising out of SA. 287 of 2021 in DRT Visakhapatnam)

¶4

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SRIVASTAVA

¶5

CHAIRPERSON

¶6

The Authorised Officer, LIC (HFL) Housing Finance Limited, BPL Plaza, 1^st Floor, D. No. 23b-9-16, Main Road, R.R. Peta, Eluru, West Godavari -534002.

¶7

LIC (HFL) Housing Finance Limited Back Office: II-G, 1^st Floor, Anand Heights, D. No. 20-4-15, C.K. Reddy Road, Kedareswara Peta, Vijayawada -520030.

¶8

…Appellants

¶9

-Versus-

¶10

1. Venkata Narayana Tummalapenta, Door No. 17-3-5, 6/1, HDFC Bank Revenue Ward No. 8, Block No. 17, Gannabathula Vari Street, Main Street, Main Road, Bhimavaram -534203

¶11

Tummalapenta Kalyani, Door No. 17-3-5, 6/1, HDFC Bank Revenue Ward No. 8, Block No. 17, Gannabathula Vari Street, Main Street, Main Road, Bhimavaram -534203

¶12

… Respondents

¶13

Counsel for the parties Mr. S. Pal Chowdhury, Learned Counsel Ms. Saswati Sikder, Learned Counsel for the Appellant Mr. M. N. Rao, Learned Counsel for the Respondent

¶14

JUDGMENT : On 15^th April, 2024

¶15

THE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL :

¶16

¶17

Heard the Learned Counsel for the parties and perused the record. Opposition filed by the Respondent is taken on record.

¶18

2. Instant Appeal has arisen against an order dated 17.09.2023 passed by Learned DRT Visakhapatnam allowing the S.A. No. 287 of 2021.

¶19

3. From the pleadings of the parties it appears that a loan of Rs. Five crore was sanctioned to the Respondents herein (SARFAESI Applicants) which was classified as NPA. Notice under Section 13(2) of the SARFAESI Act was issued by the secured creditor on 18.11.2020 for an amount of Rs.5,31,16,846.82. Possession notice was also issued on 23.04.2021. SARFAESI Application under Section 17 of the SARFAESI Act was filed by the Respondents herein challenging the action taken by the secured creditor under Section 13(4) of the SARFAESI Act as well as consequent actions taken by the secured creditor. It further appears from the pleadings that an order of the Chief Judicial Magistrate Eluru under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act was passed on 24.01.2023.

¶20

4. Secured Creditor filed the opposition to the SARFAESI Application with the assertions that notice under Section 13(2) of the SARFAESI Act was duly served upon the Respondents. Symbolic possession was taken on 26.08.2021 which was also duly served and published in two newspapers on 31.08.2021. S.A. No. 157 of 2023 was also filed by the tenant wherein conditional order was passed which was not

¶21

¶22

complied. Physical possession was taken on 05.06.2023. After hearing the Learned Counsel for the parties, Learned DRT allowed the SARFAESI Application with an option to the secured creditor to initiate fresh SARFAESI proceedings.

¶23

5. Feeling aggrieved, secured creditor preferred the appeal.

¶24

6. I have heard the Learned Counsel for the parties and perused the record.

¶25

7. At the very outset, Learned Counsel for the Appellant would submit that pending appeal an I.A. No. 475 of 2023 is filed by the Appellant under order 41 Rule 27 of the Code of Civil Procedure for filing additional evidence pending appeal. Learned Counsel for the Appellant would submit that the Learned DRT has passed the impugned judgment on the ground that the documents i.e. notice under Section 13(2) of the SARFAESI Act, Possession Notice, affixation of possession notice, newspaper publication are not filed by the secured creditor. It is submitted that all the compliances were made but the documents could not be filed as the same could not be filed despite due diligence.

¶26

8. Prayer is opposed by the Learned Counsel for the Respondents.

¶27

9. Having considered the submissions, I found the ground to be sufficient. Accordingly, application under Order 41 Rule 27 of the Code of Civil Procedure is allowed and the documents filed by the Appellant are taken on record.

¶28

¶29

10. As would appear from the impugned judgment Learned DRT has recorded a finding that the notice under Section 13(2) of the SARFAESI Act, Notice under section 13(4) of the SARFAESI Act, affixation thereon and service of the same are not brought on record by the secured creditor. Since the Appellant has been permitted to file the same pending appeal, hence it would be appropriate that an opportunity of rebuttal should be granted to the Respondents. Further, opportunity of hearing should also be granted to the parties before the Learned DRT.

¶30

11. Having considered the submissions and on the basis of discussion made above, I am of the considered view that the matter be remanded back to the Learned DRT to decide it afresh after considering the evidence filed under Order 41 Rule 27 of Code of Civil Procedure. Opportunity of filing the documents in rebuttal be also granted to the Respondent

¶31

ORDER

¶32

Appeal is Allowed. Impugned order dated 17^th September, 2023 passed by Learned DRT Visakhapatnam in S.A. No. 287 of 2021 is set aside. Matter is remanded back to the Learned DRT to decide it afresh after considering the documents filed under Order 41 Rule 27 of Code of Civil Procedure. Opportunity of filing the documents in rebuttal may be granted to the SARFAESI Applicants. After hearing the Learned Counsel for the parties, Learned DRT should

¶33

¶34

decide the matter afresh in accordance with law. Party should appear before the Learned DRT on 26^th June, 2024.

¶35

No Order as to costs.

¶36

File be consigned to Record Room.

¶37

Copy of the order be supplied to Appellant and the Respondents and a copy be also forwarded to the concerned DRT.

¶38

Copy of the Judgment/ Final Order be uploaded in the Tribunal’s Website.

¶39

Order pronounced by me in the open Court today i.e. on 15^th April, 2024.

¶40

(Anil Kumar Srivastava,J) Chairperson

¶41

Dated: 15^th April, 2024 15/tp

LIC Housing Finance Ltd. v. Venkata Narayana Tummalapenta

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

LIC Housing Finance Ltd. v. Venkata Narayana Tummalapenta

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Smt Mamata Moharana versus Bansidhar Behera

Smt Chhanda Hazra & Ors. versus Central Bank of India

State Bank Of India and Ors. versus Shyamal Chakraborty and Ors.

Ms Star Brillian versus State Bank of India

A.B. Bank Limited versus Indian Bank and Ors.

Indian Bank versus Smt Dipsikha Bhattacharjee and Ors.