Allowed

A Dhamayanthi v. State Bank of India

DRT15 Dec 2022SA/118/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Tribunal allowed an appeal against a Possession Notice issued under SARFAESI for recovery of dues. The notices were set aside because they included agricultural properties, which are exempt. Possession was restored to the mortgagor with liberty to initiate action on non-agricultural properties.

What did the court decide?

Possession Notice dated 24.02.2022 set aside; possession restored to mortgagor; liberty to initiate action on non-agricultural properties; Sarfaesi action expenses not to be debited.

A Dhamayanthi versus State Bank of India — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2022)

¶1

¶2

S.A. No.118 of 2022 15.12.2022

¶3

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHENNAI

¶4

Dated this the 15^th day of December, 2022

¶5

Present: Shri Ganapathi K.R.K. Presiding Officer

¶6

SARFAESI APPLICATION No. 118 of 2022

¶7

A.Dhamayanthi W/o.Atchayalingam No.651, Bharathiyar Road, Thalatheru, Karaikal – 609 605.

¶8

V.Jeyabal S/o.Venkatachalam No.23, Subburaya Mudhaliyars Street, Ammaaiyar Milk Diary, Karaikal – 609 602.

¶9

J.Kamalatchi, W/o.V.Jayabal No.23, Subburaya Mudhaliyars Street, Ammaaiyar Milk Diary, Karaikal – 609 602. ….Applicants Vs. The Authorised Officer, State Bank of India, Karaikal ADB Branch, Karaikal District. ….Respondent

¶10

Counsels on record / appeared:

¶11

Counsel for Applicant : M/s.K.M.Vijayan Associates. Counsel for Respondent : M/s.J.Pothiraj

¶12

¶13

S.A. No.118 of 2022 15.12.2022

¶14

ORDER

¶15

This SA is filed challenging the Possession Notice dated 24.02.2022 issued by respondent bank for recovery of a sum of Rs.51,13,173/- due as on 21.02.2022.

¶16

Today a memo is filed on behalf of applicant submitting therein that at the time of hearing of SA, it was brought to the knowledge of respondent bank that notices under the Act was issued for agricultural properties along with other commercial properties of applicants herein. Hence respondent bank by way of this memo is seeking permission to withdraw the statutory notices issued under Section 13(2) dated 15.02.2021 and Section 13(4) dated 24.02.2022 with liberty to issue fresh notices for recovery of outstanding amount due from borrowers. Copy of memo is served to Ld. counsel appearing for applicant by respondent bank.

¶17

Heard. Memo filed on behalf of respondent bank is taken on file. In the result, this SA is allowed, however without costs. Possession Notice dated 24.02.2022 is hereby set aside and possession is restored to mortgagor. Respondent bank is directed not to debit their SARFAESI action expenses to borrower’s loan account. However, liberty be with respondent bank to initiate action afresh against non-agricultural properties, if the default of the borrower continues. Interim order, if any granted and subsisting till this day stands vacated and all other IAs, if any pending stand closed.

¶18

With the above directions, this SA stands disposed.

¶19

¶20

S.A. No.118 of 2022 15.12.2022

¶21

A copy of the order be communicated to the parties concerned as per extant guidelines.

¶22

(Dictated to PS, transcribed by her, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in Open Court, on this the 15^th day of December, 2022)

¶23

Sd/-

¶24

(GANAPATHI K.R.K) PRESIDING OFFICER

A Dhamayanthi v. State Bank of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

A Dhamayanthi v. State Bank of India

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

Similar cases

P R Engineers and Contractors versus Icici Bank Limited

Arul versus Tamilnad Mercantile Bank Limited

Moises Lawrence versus Indian Overseas Bank

Gopinath B J and others versus Dcb Bank Limited

Mrs v Radhika D o Seshagiri Rao versus Dcb Bank Limited

SSdiq Ali Son of Mohammed Ahifa versus Repco Home Finance Limited