Disposed

S Francis Arockia Marian v. The Sub Collector Tuticorin and Ors.

DRAT30 Jan 2025MISC APPEAL/15/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Tribunal addressed an appeal against the dismissal of an application seeking protection from dispossession under the SARFAESI Act. Upon ascertaining that possession had allegedly been taken, the appeal was remanded to the DRT for disposal of the main suit and extension of interim protection.

What did the court decide?

Appeal remanded to the DRT for disposal of the main suit; interim protection extended for two months; parties to bear own costs.

S Francis Arockia Marian versus The Sub Collector Tuticorin… — Company and Corporate | DRAT (2025)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AT CHENNAI

¶2

Dated the, 30^th January 2025

¶3

PRESENT: Hon’ble Mr. Justice G. Chandrasekharan

¶4

CHAIRPERSON

¶5

MA (SA) 15/2020

¶6

(Arising out of IA 1231/2019 in SA 338/2019 on the file of DRT, Madurai)

¶7

Between

¶8

S. Francis Arockia Marian S/o. A. Savari Muthu, No.1/186, Kamarajar Street, Pudukottai Post, Tuticorin – 628 103 … Appellant

¶9

And

¶10

The Sub Collector/ Collectrate Tuticorin , Tuticorin District.

¶11

The Tashildhar, Tuticorin District.

¶12

The Authorised Officer, City Union Bank Administrative Office, No. 24 b, Gandhi Nagar, Kumbakonam Thanjavur District – 612 001 … Respondents Counsel for Appellant : M/s. Chennai Law Associates Counsel for R3 : Mr.A.Karthikeyan

¶13

ORDER

¶14

Ld. Counsel for appellant and Ld. Counsel for 3^rd respondent are present.

¶15

This appeal is filed challenging the order passed in IA 1231/2019 in SA 338/2019 before DRT, Madurai. Ld.Counsel for the appellant submitted that IA 1231/2019 was filed praying to stay all further proceedings of the order passed by the 1^st defendant in Na.Ka.A1/4686/2018 dated 31.05.2019. After enquiry, the Ld. Presiding Officer dismissed the said IA and hence this appeal is filed.

¶16

The reading of the order of Ld. Presiding Officer shows that in an application filed by 3^rd defendant/respondent, the District Magistrate, Tuticorin passed an order on 09.11.2018, directing the 1st defendant/respondent to take physical possession of the property and hand over the same to the 3rd defendant/respondent. On receipt of the said order, 1^st defendant passed an order dated 31.05.2019 directing the 2^nd defendant/respondent to take physical possession of the petition mentioned schedule property and hand over to the 3^rd defendant. The Ld. Presiding Officer recorded that as per the Provisions of Sec.14 (1-A) of the SARFAESI Act 2002, the District Magistrate may authorize any officer Sub-ordinate to him to take the possession of the assets and forward the same to the secured creditor. Thus finding no fault in the order passed by the respondents 1 and 2, the said application was dismissed.

¶17

When the matter was heard on 28.01.2025, this Tribunal queried as to the stage of the proceedings in SA 338/2019 and as to whether possession had been taken and any sale had taken place.

¶18

Today, Ld. Counsel for the respondent 3 submitted that possession had already been taken on 27.11.2019. However, sale has not taken place. Thus, Ld. Counsel submits that this appeal itself becomes infructuous.

¶19

The submission with regard to taking possession on 27.11.2019 by the respondent 3, is disputed by the Ld.Counsel for appellant for the reason that on 27.11.2019, this Tribunal, on compliance of the condition to make a predeposit, granted protection to the appellant from dispossession. Obviously when the order was passed, erstwhile Counsel on record for R3, Mr. Sethuraman, was present. If the possession was taken on 27.11.2019 as claimed by the Ld. Counsel for R3, it is against the order passed by this Tribunal on 27.11.2019. Be that as it may.

¶20

Now, in the light of the submissions made by the counsels appearing for both the parties, and the controversy with regard to taking possession or not, this Tribunal relegates this appeal to the Ld. Presiding Officer, DRT, Madurai to dispose the SA 338/2019, as expeditiously as possible and consider including the claim of taking possession on 27.11.2019. Interim protection already granted is extended for a further period of two months. If appellant requires further extension for protection, appellant may approach the Ld. Presiding Officer, DRT, Madurai, for the same.

¶21

Accordingly, this MA (SA) 15/2020 is disposed.

¶22

Parties are directed to bear their own costs. Pending IAs, if any, stands closed.

¶23

[Dictated to Steno (DD), transcribed by her, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in open court, this 30^th January, 2025]

S Francis Arockia Marian v. The Sub Collector Tuticorin and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

S Francis Arockia Marian v. The Sub Collector Tuticorin and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Mrs Selvi versus Messers Cholamandalam Investment and Finance Company Ltd.

The Authorised Officer Aptus Value Hosuing Finance India Ltd. versus Mrs Vedhanayagi v

Noel Anthuvan versus Repco Home finance Limited

Yenfor Ventures Pvt. Ltd. versus State Bank of India

H S Savitri versus Union Bank of India

State Bank of India versus First Choice Forex and Service Pvt. Ltd. & Ors.