Disposed

S S Vasan v. Indian Bank

DRAT4 Jun 2025MISC APPEAL/13/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal disposed of an appeal filed under Section 18 of the SARFAESI Act against an interim stay order. The Tribunal directed the Presiding Officer of DRT-II to dispose of the main sale appeal rapidly, noting that the sale had ultimately failed due to the withdrawal of the auction purchaser.

What did the court decide?

Appeal disposed with direction to DRT Presiding Officer to dispose of main SA No.77/2023 (renumbered TSA No.196/2023) expeditiously.

S S Vasan versus Indian Bank — Banking and Recovery | DRAT (2025)

¶1

MA(SA) 13/2022

¶2

IN THE DEBT RECOVERY APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AT CHENNAI

¶3

Dated the 4^th day of June, 2025

¶4

PRESENT: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE G. CHANDRASEKHARAN CHAIRPERSON

¶5

MA (SA) 13/2022

¶6

(arising out of IA No.198/2022 in SA No.77/2022 on the file of DRT-I, Chennai ) (Renumbered as TSA No.196/2023 on the file of DRT-II, Chennai)

¶7

Between

¶8

1. Mr. S.S. Vasan S/o Late Mr. P. Soundararajan

¶9

2. Mrs. Jayanthi, W/o Mr. S.S. Vasan

¶10

Both are residing at:

¶11

No.12/2, Muthu Mudali Street, Royapettah, Chennai 600 014.

¶12

…..Appellants

¶13

And

¶14

Indian Bank, Sterling Road Branch, Rep. by its Authorised Officer, No.36, Sterling Road, Chennai 600 034.

¶15

…..Respondent Bank

¶16

Counsel for Appellants : M/s G. Desingu & Co. Counsel for Respondent Bank : M/s Hemalath Suresh & Co.

¶17

ORDER

¶18

This appeal is filed under Section 18 of the SARFAESI Act against the order passed by Learned Presiding Officer, DRT-I, Chennai (in-charge of DRT-II, Chennai), passed in IA No.198/2022 in SA No.77/2022 (renumbered as TSA No.196/2023, DRT-II, Chennai) dated 24.2.2022.

¶19

¶20

MA(SA) 13/2022

¶21

The aforesaid IA 198/2022 was filed by the appellants seeking stay of sale proceedings pursuant to Sale Notice dated 11.2.2022. Learned Presiding Officer passed an order on 24.2.2022, staying the confirmation of sale for a period of six weeks on a condition of appellants remitting Rs.5.00 lakhs with the respondent bank on or before 11.00 AM on 28.2.2022 and another sum of Rs.20.00 lakhs within four weeks thereafter. Challenging this order, this appeal is filed.

¶22

Learned counsel for appellants submitted that Rs.5.00 lakhs was deposited by the remaining amount was not deposited.

¶23

Learned Counsel for respondent bank submitted that subsequent to the sale of the property in favour of one Ms. Kanimozhi, sale could not be confirmed for the reason that the appeal proceedings ares pending before this Tribunal. Therefore, the said Ms. Kanimozi did not show any interest in continuing with the sale proceedings. It is her further submission that bank had, therefore, returned the EMD amount deposited by the Auction Purchaser viz. Ms. Kanimozhi and ultimately the sale had failed. Again, in view of this appeal proceedings, further sale measures have not been initiated by the respondent bank. Learned Counsel further submitted that technically, SA No.77/2022 has now become infructuous.

¶24

Heard Learned Counsel for both sides and perused the records.

¶25

It is seen that appellants complied with the pre-deposit requirement for entertaining this appeal. Considering the submissions made by Learned counsel appearing for parties, this Tribunal finds that in view of failure of sale on withdrawal by the auction purchaser, nothing survives in this SA.

¶26

¶27

MA(SA) 13/2022

¶28

Since this appeal is filed against an interim order, this Tribunal is of the view that this appeal may be disposed with a direction to Learned Presiding Officer, DRT-II, Chennai to dispose of main SA, i.e, TSA No.196/2023, as expeditiously as possible and in accordance with law.

¶29

In this view of the matter, Learned Presiding Officer, DRT-II, Chennai is directed to dispose of TSA No.196/2023 (SA No.77/2022 on the file of DRT-I, Chennai), as expeditiously as possible and in accordance with law, taking note of the fact that sale held in pursuance of sale notice dated 11.2.2022 had ultimately failed.

¶30

In the result, Appeal MA(SA) 13/2022 is disposed of, with the above direction. Parties are directed to bear their own costs.

¶31

Pending IAs, if any, stand closed.

¶32

[Dictated to Steno(SN), transcribed by him, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in open court, this 4^th Day of June, 2025)

¶33

Sd/- (JUSTICE G. CHANDRASEKHARAN) CHAIRPERSON

¶34

S S Vasan v. Indian Bank

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

S S Vasan v. Indian Bank

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

M/s. Yesskay Renewable Venture Private Limited versus Tamilnad Mercantile Bank Limited

Biji Haridas and another versus Muvattupuzha Urban Co-Operative Bank Ltd.

Sulaiman Assanar Kunju Son of Assanar Kunju versus Icici Bank Limited

A.O.,State Bank of India & Ors. versus Shakeel Ahmed Ismail @ Kalghatgi &ors

SBI versus M/s.Owshad amroodh naturaceuticals & Anr.

G Kamal Chand versus Dbs Bank Limited