V.Anitha v. Indian Bank
Case brief
What is this about?
DRT allowed SARFAESI application seeking quashing of possession notice withdrawn by bank. Possession restored to mortgagor; bank directed not to debit notice expenses but retained liberty to proceed on default.
What did the court decide?
Possession notice dated 22.12.2021 set aside; possession restored to mortgagor; bank not to debit notice expenses.
What the court decided
1
S.A. 90 of 2022 14.11.2022
IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHENNAI
Dated this the 14th day of November, 2022
Present: Shri Ganapathi K.R.K.
Presiding Officer
SARFAESI APPLICATION No. 90 of 2022
Mrs. V. Anitha W/o Sh. G. Venkatesan, No.50/77, BajanaiKoil Street, Padi – 600 050 …Applicant
Vs.
The Authorised Officer, Indian Bank, Korattur Branch, No.14, 31st Street, Periyar Nagar, Chennai – 600 080 ….Respondent
Counsels on record / appeared:
Counsel for Applicant : M/s. Antony Selvam & RKM Suresh Counsel for Respondent : M/s Saravana Prakash
Issues for consideration
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the SARFAESI application challenging a possession notice should be allowed upon the borrower showing that possession notices are no longer required.
Parties & counsel
- applicant
Mrs. V. Anitha
- respondent
The Authorised Officer, Indian Bank, Korattur Branch
Coram
Ganapathi K.R.K.
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court