Allowed

Mr K Palanimuthu v. Indian Overseas Bank

DRT4 May 2023SA/192/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed this SARFAESI application where the applicant challenged a possession notice for a deceased borrower. The Tribunal approved recalling the action pending furnishing of legal heir details, directing the bank not to debit expenses.

What did the court decide?

SARFAESI application allowed; bank directed to recall actions and not debit expenses pending furnishing of legal heir details.

Mr K Palanimuthu versus Indian Overseas Bank — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2023)

¶1

¶2

S.A. 192 of 2023 04.05.2023

¶3

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHENNAI

¶4

Dated this the 04^th day of May, 2023

¶5

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

¶6

SARFAESI APPLICATION No. 192 of 2023

¶7

Mr.K.Palanimuthu S/o.Kandasamy 35/1, Pappampadi Pappampadi village & post Pappireddipatti Taluk Dharmapuri District – 636 905 ….Applicant

¶8

Vs.

¶9

The Authorised Officer Indian Overseas Bank Regional Office Five Roads Salem – 636 004 ….Respondent

¶10

Counsels on record / appeared:

¶11

Counsel for Applicant : M/s. S.Arulselvan, D.Vijayakumar & Vinod Jai Vimal Counsel for Respondent : M/s. V.Rajeswari

¶12

ORDER

¶13

This SA is filed challenging the Possession Notice dated 18.02.2023 issued by respondent bank for recovery of a sum of Rs.39,58,279/-.

¶14

Heard the Ld.Counsels appearing for both the parties.

¶15

It is the case of applicant that the demand notice issued by the respondent bank

¶16

is made to a dead person, who is the principal borrower. Ld.Counsel for applicant submits that applicant is one of the legal heirs of the deceased borrower while his

¶17

¶18

S.A. 192 of 2023 04.05.2023

¶19

mother is also yet another legal heir. Ld.Counsel further undertakes to furnish the information of legal heirs of the deceased borrower to the respondent bank by or before 20.05.2023.

¶20

Ld.Counsel for respondent bank submits that it is to the knowledge of respondent bank only after filing of this SA by applicant herein. In fact, erroneously, respondent bank by over sight, could not reply on this aspect while issuing reply to objections of applicant to their demand notice under Section 13 (2). Ld.Counsel further submits that in continuation to the demand notice, respondent bank has issued the impugned possession notice. Ld.counsel submits that respondent bank would recall their SARFAESI actions and initiate afresh if applicant furnishes the particulars of legal heirs to the deceased borrower. Submitting so, Ld.Counsel submitted that appropriate orders be passed in this SA with liberty to respondent bank to proceed further after getting information about legal heirs of the deceased borrower. Ld.counsel for applicant submitted that the same shall be furnished to respondent bank by or before 20.05.2023, although he stated that applicant and his mother are the only surviving legal heirs.

¶21

In the result, as respondent bank intends to withdraw their SARFAESI actions with liberty to initiate action afresh, the present SA is liable to be allowed. Accordingly SA stand allowed. Respondent bank is directed not to debit their SARFAESI expenses to the borrowers loan account. However liberty be with respondent bank to initiate action afresh if the default of the borrower continues. Interim order, if any granted and subsisting till this day stands vacated and all other IAs, if any pending stand closed.

¶22

With the above directions, this SA stands disposed.

¶23

¶24

S.A. 192 of 2023 04.05.2023

¶25

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

¶26

guidelines.

¶27

(Dictated to Stenographer (DD), transcribed by her, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in Open Court, on this the 04^th day of May, 2023)

¶28

Sd/-

¶29

(GANAPATHI K.R.K) PRESIDING OFFICER

Mr K Palanimuthu v. Indian Overseas Bank

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mr K Palanimuthu v. Indian Overseas Bank

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

K S Rameshkumar versus South Indian Bank

Karnataka Bank Limited versus Kowsalya Modern Rice Mill

T N Sirajudeen versus Punjab National Bank

M s Donas Motors Pvt. Ltd. versus Karur Vysya Bank

Mr N Thiruvengadam versus M s Orix Leasing And Financial Services India Limited

Vsr Devadass versus Indian Bank