Disposed

Joseph Mani v. State Bank of India

DRT19 Oct 2023SA/13/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal disposed of the SARFAESI application filed challenging an auction sale notice. The application was rejected as infructuous since the applicant had paid the entire outstanding loan amount, and the bank had closed the accounts.

What did the court decide?

SARFAESI Application disposed of as infructuous due to settlement of account; interim orders vacated; pending IAs closed.

Joseph Mani versus State Bank of India — Specific Performance | DRT (2023)

¶1

¶2

S.A.13 of 2023 19.10.2023

¶3

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHENNAI

¶4

Dated this the 19^th day of October, 2023

¶5

Present: Shri Ganapathi K.R.K.

¶6

Presiding Officer

¶7

SARFAESI APPLICATION No. 13 of 2023

¶8

Mr.K.Joseph Mani, S/o.Mr.Augustine Joseph, Partner of M/s.Madras Door Company, Plot No.81 & 82, EPIP Zone, SIPCOT Industrial Estate,

¶9

Gummidipoondi – 601 203. ….Applicant

¶10

Vs.

¶11

The Authorised Officer, State Bank of India, Stressed Assets Recovery Branch, 2^nd Floor, Red Cross Buildings, #32, Red Cross Road, Egmore, Chennai – 600 008. 2. State Bank of India, Small and Medium Enterprises Branch, Rep. by its Assistant General Manager, No.39, Prashanth Real Gold Tower, 6^th Floor, North Usman Road, T.Nagar, Chennai – 600 017. ….Respondents Counsels on record / appeared: Counsel for Applicant : M/s.S.Vignesh. Counsel for 1^st Respondent : M/s.M.L.Ganesh.

¶12

ORDER

¶13

This SA is filed challenging the Auction Sale Notice dated 01.12.2022 issued by respondent bank scheduling sale to 10.01.2023 for recovery of a sum of Rs.4,78,49,443/-.

¶14

¶15

S.A.13 of 2023 19.10.2023

¶16

Heard Ld. counsel appearing for applicant, who submitted that during the pendency of SA, applicant had approached respondent bank and paid the entire outstanding amount towards subject loan accounts and respondent had closed the loan accounts on 11.09.2023 and hence the present SA challenging the measures imitated by respondent has become infructuous. Copy of no due certificate dated 13.09.2023 issued by respondent. Thus submitting, Ld. counsel prayed for passing necessary orders.

¶17

In the result, this SA is disposed, in view of settlement of account by borrower, however without costs. 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 observations, this SA stands disposed.

¶19

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

¶20

(Dictated to PS, transcribed by her, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in Open Court, on this the 19^th day of October, 2023)

¶21

Sd/-

¶22

(GANAPATHI K.R.K) PRESIDING OFFICER

Joseph Mani v. State Bank of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Joseph Mani v. State Bank of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Union Bank of India versus Valliappan

Icici Bank Limited versus Kavitha

Bank of India versus Master Frames

Punjab National Bank (Oriental Bank of Commerce) versus M/S Vijaya Ganapaty Papers Rep by Its Prop Mrs v Prasannakumari

City Union Bank Limited versus Kadiravan

Padma Manohar versus Cholamandalam Investment and Finance Company Ltd.