Partly allowed

Senthilnayakam v. Repco Bank

DRT16 Aug 2023SA/270/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this SARFAESI application, the Tribunal allowed the challenge against a possession notice and a demand notice issued by the respondent financial institution due to inadvertent errors. The possession notice was set aside, possession restored, and directions were issued regarding expenses and future action.

What did the court decide?

Possession notice dated 05.05.2023 set aside, possession restored to mortgagor, demand notice expenses not to be debited.

Senthilnayakam versus Repco Bank — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2023)

SA No. 270 of 2023

16.08.2023

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL - III, CHENNAI

¶5

Dated this the 16^th day of August, 2023

¶6

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

¶7

SARFAESI APPLICATION No. 270 of 2023

¶8

Mr. M.Senthilnayakam

¶9

S/o. Muttu Ganesh No.40, 1^st Cross Street, Thendral Nagar West Thirumullaivoyal – 600 062

¶10

….Applicant

¶11

Vs.

¶12

The Authorised Officer

¶13

REPCO Home Finance Limited 3^rd Floor, Alexander Square New No.2 (Old No.34 & 35) Sardar Patel Road Guindy Chennai – 600 032 ….Respondent

¶14

Counsels on record / appeared:

¶15

Counsel for Applicant : M/s. P.Ramamoorthi Counsel for Respondent : M/s. A.Ilangovan

¶16

ORDER

¶17

This SA is filed challenging the Possession Notice dated 05.05.2023 issued by respondent financial institution, for recovery of a sum of Rs.31,91,822/-.

¶18

Today a memo vide SR.No.10806/2023 is filed on behalf of respondent financial institution submitting therein that due to some inadvertent errors made by respondent in

¶19

the demand and impugned possession notices, respondent may be permitted to withdraw the demand notice dated 04.11.2022 and impugned possession notice dated

SA No. 270 of 2023

16.08.2023

05.05.2023, with liberty to initiate action afresh. Thus submitting, Ld. counsel prayed for passing necessary orders.

¶24

Copy of memo is served on the Ld.Counsel for applicant. Memo filed on behalf of respondent financial institution is taken on record.

¶25

In the result, this SA is allowed, however without costs. Possession Notice dated 05.05.2023 is hereby set aside and possession is restored to mortgagor. Respondent financial institution is directed not to debit the demand notice and subject impugned possession notice expenses to the borrower’s loan account. However, liberty be with respondent financial institution to proceed further in accordance to law, if the default of the borrower continues.

¶26

Interim order, if any granted and subsisting till this day stands vacated and all other IAs, if any pending stand closed.

¶27

With the above observations, this 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/- (GANAPATHI K.R.K) PRESIDING OFFICER

Senthilnayakam v. Repco Bank

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Senthilnayakam v. Repco Bank

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

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

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