Allowed

M/s Annai Veilankannis Educational and Cultural Society v. Union Bank of India

DRT16 Aug 2023SA/174/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Debt Recovery Tribunal allowed the SARFAESI application challenging an infructuous and procedurally flawed sale notice. The Tribunal granted the applicants liberty to approach the bank for settlement, directing the bank not to debit sale expenses.

What did the court decide?

Sale notice expunged; no sale expenses to be debited; liberty to approach bank for settlement within 4 weeks or by 20.09.2023; interim order vacated.

M/s Annai Veilankannis Educational and Cultural Society versus… — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2023)

¶1

¶2

S.A. 174 of 2023 16.08.2023

¶3

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHENNAI

¶4

Dated this the 16^th day of August, 2023

¶5

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

¶6

SARFAESI APPLICATION No. 174 of 2023

¶7

1. M/s Annai Velankanni’s Educational and Cultural Society Rep. by its president, S.Devaraj No.81, VGP Salai Saidapet

¶8

Chennai – 600 015

¶9

2. Mr.S.Devaraj

¶10

S/o.Late Mr. Sabarianantham Asan No.81, VGP Salai Saidapet Chennai – 600 015 ….Applicants

¶11

Vs.

¶12

The Authorised Officer

¶13

Union Bank of India Ashok Nagar – 1 Branch Plot No.1208, 1^st avenue Ashok Nagar Opp. Police training college Chennai – 600 083 ….Respondent

¶14

Counsels on record / appeared:

¶15

Counsel for Applicants : M/s. S.Wilson Counsel for Respondent : M/s. G.V.AnjaneyaBabu

¶16

ORDER

¶17

This SA is filed challenging the Sale Notice dated 25.02.2023 issued by respondent bank scheduling the sale to 28.03.2023 for recovery of a sum of Rs.11,74,58,662.21p.

¶18

Heard Ld.Counsels appearing for both the parties.

¶19

¶20

S.A. 174 of 2023 16.08.2023

¶21

It is the case of applicants that they intend to approach respondent for an amicable settlement and that their negotiations are underway. Ld.Counsel submits that applicants had already complied the interim order imposed by this Tribunal at the time of moving the SA and therefore no sale has taken place on the scheduled date, owing to which, the impugned sale notice has become infructuous. Ld.Counsel further submitted that respondent bank has not followed the procedure as warranted under law while issuing the impugned sale notice, in as much as no 30 days time is granted for the applicants to redeem the property from the date of service of sale notice to the date of scheduled sale. It is also submitted that respondent bank has not furnished any documents contrary to the contentions caused on behalf of applicants with regard to service of the sale notice. However, it is the case of applicants that they intend to settle the loan account with respondent bank within 4 weeks and would not like to agitate the issue. Submitting so, Ld.Counsel prayed for appropriate orders.

¶22

Whereas Ld.Counsel for respondent bank submitted that counter and typed set of documents are duly filed, after serving copies on the other side. Ld.Counsel had conceded to the infirmity in service of sale notice and submitted that there are no clear 30 days between the service of sale notice and date of scheduled sale.

¶23

In the circumstances, as respondent bank could not establish its actions while issuing the impugned sale notice, the present SA is liable to be allowed and accordingly, SA stands allowed. Respondent bank is directed not to debit the sale notice expenses to the borrowers loan account. Interim order if any stands vacated. All other IAs stand closed.

¶24

¶25

S.A. 174 of 2023 16.08.2023

¶26

Liberty be with applicants to approach respondent bank for an amicable settlement in terms of their representations at the bench within 4 weeks and in any case not later than 20.09.2023. Respondent bank will be at liberty to proceed further in accordance to law, if the default of the borrower continues beyond 20.09.2023.

¶27

With the above directions, SA stands disposed.

¶28

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

¶29

(Dictated to Steno (DD), transcribed by her, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in Open Court, on this the 16^th day of August, 2023)

¶30

Sd/-

¶31

(GANAPATHI K.R.K)

¶32

PRESIDING OFFICER

M/s Annai Veilankannis Educational and Cultural Society v. Union Bank of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/s Annai Veilankannis Educational and Cultural Society v. Union Bank of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Aruna Constructions versus Indian Overseas Bank

State Bank of India versus Nishanraj

K Lalitha versus Punjab National Bank

Ravanan versus Sundaram Home Finance Limited

Senthilnayakam versus Repco Bank

Export Import Bank of India versus M/S Haldia Coke and Chemicals Pvt. Ltd.