Dismissed

Thaheera Begum v. Repco Home Finance Limited

DRT17 Aug 2022SA/59/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal dismissed the applicant's SARFAESI application challenging a possession notice issued by the respondent for recovery of dues. The tribunal held there were no procedural infirmities in the issuance of the notice.

What did the court decide?

The SARFAESI application was dismissed; liberty granted to the applicant to approach the bank for a negotiated settlement.

Thaheera Begum versus Repco Home Finance Limited — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2022)

¶1

¶2

S.A. No.59 of 2022 17.08.2022

¶3

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHENNAI

¶4

Dated this the 17^th day of August, 2022

¶5

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

¶6

SARFAESI APPLICATION No. 59 of 2022

¶7

Mrs.Thaheera Begum W/o.Abdul Gani No.406, Jawahar Street Suthana Nagar, Nainarmandabam Puducherry – 605 004

¶8

….Applicant

¶9

Vs.

¶10

1. The Authorized Officer

¶11

Repco Home Finance Limited Corporate Office. 3^rd Floor Alexandar Square New No.2 (Old No.34 & 35) Sardar Patel Road, Guindy Chennai – 600 032

¶12

Also at

¶13

Repco Home Finance Limited Repco Tower, No.33, North Usman Road T.Nagar, Chennai – 600 017

¶14

2. Repco Home Finance Limited

¶15

40A, Ground Floor Vivek Arcade, 45 Feet Road Vallalar Salai, Kamaraj Nagar Pondicherry – 605 001. ….Respondents

¶16

Counsels on record / appeared:

¶17

Counsel for Applicant : M/s.Ramalingam & Associates Counsel for Respondents : M/S.A.Ilangovan

¶18

¶19

S.A. No.59 of 2022 17.08.2022

¶20

ORDER

¶21

This SA is filed by applicant challenging the Possession Notice dated 29.11.2021 issued by respondent bank for recovery of a sum of Rs.23,25,163/-.

¶22

Respondent financial institution entered appearance and filed counter and typed set of documents evidencing the action taken by them under the Act.

¶23

Heard Ld. counsels appearing for the respective parties. It is the case of applicant that she along with her husband since deceased availed credit facility to the tune of Rs.20 lakhs from respondent during June, 2019 and was regular in repayment of installments and had remitted 10 EMIs without any delay or default. However, due to Pandemic Covid-19, applicant could not continue to remit the EMIs thus resulting in account being classified as NPA by respondent. It is the case of applicant that no demand notice was served on her by applicant and the subject impugned possession notice issued by respondent is therefore bad in law.

¶24

Whereas Ld. counsel for respondent institution submitted that availing of loan, execution of loan and security documents and default committed in repayment of dues are all admitted by applicant. Despite repeated assurances given by applicant for repayment of dues, the loan account remained irregular owing to non-payment of dues as per the terms and conditions. Hence borrower’s loan account slipped into NPA status on 30.01.2021. Respondent initiated recovery measures under SARFAESI Act and issued Demand Notice on 22.07.2021 under Section13 (2) of the Act, which was duly served on borrowers and guarantors as evidenced from the acknowledgment cards

¶25

¶26

S.A. No.59 of 2022 17.08.2022

¶27

produced along with typed set of documents. Despite receipt of demand notice, as applicant evaded payment, respondent proceeded further and issued Possession Notice dated 29.11.2021 under Section 13(4) of the Act, which was duly served on the borrower, co-borrower and guarantor, affixed and published in two newspapers in compliance of mandatory provisions of the Act. Ld. counsel for respondent submitted that there are no infirmities in the procedure adopted by the respondent while issuing the subject impugned possession notice and that the present SA is filed by applicant only to stall the recovery process initiated by the respondent.

¶28

As there are no infirmities in the procedure adopted by the respondent bank while issuing the subject impugned possession notice, this SA is liable to be dismissed. Interim order, if any granted and subsisting till this day stands vacated and all other IAs, if any pending stand closed. However, applicant is at liberty to approach respondent bank for a negotiated settlement and settle his loan account by or before 30.09.2022. Liberty be with respondent bank to proceed further with their SARFAESI actions beyond 30.09.2022, if the default of the borrower continues.

¶29

With the above observations, this SA stands disposed.

¶30

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

¶31

(Dictated to PS, transcribed by her, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in Open Court, on this the 17^th day of August, 2022)

¶32

Sd/- (GANAPATHI K.R.K) PRESIDING OFFICER

Thaheera Begum v. Repco Home Finance Limited

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Thaheera Begum v. Repco Home Finance Limited

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

New Care Printers Solutions versus Canara Bank

The Cosmos Co. operative Bank Ltd. versus Ms K Divya

P Vinoth versus Tamilnad Mercantile Bank Limited

Nagavalli versus Canara Bank

K Linkesh versus Tamilnad Mercantile Bank Limited

The Cosmos Co. operative Bank Ltd. versus Sri Muthumariamman Container