In this SARFAESI application, applicants challenged a Sale Notice due to alleged failure to regularize their account after payment and excess interest charges. The court dismissed the application, noting no tenable merits in the challenge.
Sale Notice remains operative; application dismissed without costs; interim orders vacated.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
S.A. 125 of 2022 10.10.2022
IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHENNAI
Dated this the 10th day of October, 2022
Present: Shri Ganapathi K.R.K. Presiding Officer
SARFAESI APPLICATION No. 125 of 2022
| 2. | Mr.Srinivasan.R |
|---|---|
| S/o.Radhakrishnan, No.8, Valarmathi illam, Chinnasamy Layout, Lakshmipuram, Peelamedu, Coimbatore – 641 004. |
|
| 3. | Mr.Radhakrishnan.V S/o.Venugopal, |
| 5/40, VOC Street, Okkiyampettai, Thoraipakkam, |
|
| Chennai – 600097. …Applicants Vs. |
|
| 1. | Tamilnadu Mercantile Bank Limited, Dr.Nanjappa Road Branch, |
| Represented by its Chief Manager & Authorised Officer, 364, Dr.Nanjappa Road, Opp.V.O.C Park, Coimbatore – 641018. |
|
| 2. | Tamilnadu Mercantile Bank Limited Sholinganallur Branch, Represented by its Chief Manager & Authorised Officer No.125/1, IT Highway, Old Mahabalipuram Road, Sholinganallur, Chennai – 600 119. ….Respondents |
| Counsels on record / appeared: | |
| Counsel for Applicant : M/s.C.Russel Raj, R.Shrilekha. |
|
| Counsel for Respondent : M/s.K.N.Chinnakrishnan, E.Kumar. |
2
S.A. 125 of 2022 10.10.2022
ORDER
3
S.A. 125 of 2022 10.10.2022
and objections raising the frivolous plea of not reconciling the statement of account with their contemplated rate of interest. It is submitted that respondent bank has levied interest only as per contractual obligations and not at their whims and fancies as being contended by the applicants herein. Ld. counsel further submitted that no sale has taken place owing to compliance of the interim condition by the applicants herein and that the impugned sale notice has become infructuous. Ld. counsel has demonstrated through their counter and typed set of documents, the procedure adopted while issuing the impugned sale notice which are found to be in accordance to law. Ld. counsel submitted further that applicants did not execute the renewal documents of the Cash Credit facility, owing to which inaction the account continued to be in the status of NPA despite causing payment of Rs.36 lakhs. All the efforts of the respondent bank for getting executed the renewal documents proved futile. Ld. counsel for respondent bank submits that applicants were not operating their account which are prompted respondent bank to continue their actions. Ld. counsel submits that there are no infirmities in the procedure adopted by the respondent bank and therefore prayed for appropriate order.
4
S.A. 125 of 2022 10.10.2022
any granted and subsisting till this day stands vacated and all other IAs, if any pending stand closed.
(Dictated to PS, transcribed by her, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in Open Court, on this the 10th day of October, 2022)
Sd/- (GANAPATHI K.R.K) PRESIDING OFFICER
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the Sale Notice issued by the bank under SARFAESI is sustainable given the applicants' claim of partial regularization and alleged excess interest charges.
M/s. Chenkem Proprietor.
Mr. Radhakrishnan.V
Tamilnadu Mercantile Bank Limited, Dr.Nanjappa Road Branch
Tamilnadu Mercantile Bank Limited, Sholinganallur Branch
Shri Ganapathi K.R.K.
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
