Allowed

Sarala Marelly v. the National Trust Housing Finance Limited

DRT22 Dec 2023SA/342/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Securitization Application filed assailing the respondent's auction notice and taking of possession. Application allowed as respondent appeared ex parte, forcing the court to accept unrefuted contentions regarding non-compliance with the Securitisation Act.

What did the court decide?

Securitization Application allowed by setting aside the action of the sale notice dated 26.11.2022 and taking of possession of the schedule property.

Sarala Marelly versus the National Trust Housing Finance… — Company and Corporate | DRT (2023)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-II AT HYDEMBAD

¶2

DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF DECEMBER, 2023

¶3

PRESENT: SH. RAMESHWAR KoTHE, B.com, L.LB. (Hons.), M.A. PRESIDING OFFICER

¶4

Securitization Application No. 342 OF 2OZ2

¶5

Between:

¶6

Sarala Marelly Wo^M. Shiva Shankar Aged about 41 years Occ: Household H. No. 6-6-16, Raju Colony Balanagar. Hyderabad-42.

¶7

........Applicant.

¶8

Versus

¶9

The National Trust Housing Finance Limited Branch Office, Flat No. 301 H. No. 6-2-983, Diamond Tower 2nd Floor, Beside Axis Bank Near Shadan College Khairatabad, Hyderabad-500004 Rep. by its Manager.

¶10

.......Respondent.

¶11

Counsel for the Applicant : Ms. Najeeba Sultana, Counsel for Respondent : Ex pafte.

¶12

-:ORDER:-

¶13

The present Securitization Application is filed by the Applicant uls.77(t) of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 assailing the auction notice dated 26,LL.2022 issued by the respondent company against the sA schedule property. ,fln t-. ^b a/t^{./r1:\ L -}

¶14

20f3

¶15

sA No.342l2022

¶16

2.Thefactsofthecaseasaverredbytheapplicant'inbrief'are that the^{respondent took over the possessionof the secured asset} through^{advocate commissioner appointed in Crl M'P' No' 26312023and} is^proceedingto 9o^{for auction sale without following due processof} law. The claim^{amountof the respondentis basedon higher rate of} interest^{contraryto banking norms' Wlth these contentions'applicant} prays for^{quashing of e-auctionsale noticedated26 11'2022 ln the} interest of^justice.

¶17

After filing^{vakalat by learned counsel for respondentcompany'} thereWaSnorepresentationandaccordinglytherespondentwassetex parte on 15.11.2023^{for non-representation'}

¶18

Heard learned^{counselappearing for the applicantand perused} the material^{brought on record'}

¶19

It is^{the contention of the learned counsel that respondent's} action in taking^{the physical possessionof the SA schedule property} through advocate^{commissionerand subsequentaction to put the} property for sale^{throughauction sale notice dated 26'11'2022 without} following due^{process of law, is liable to be set aside'}

¶20

Since the^{respondent remained ex parte, no proof is avallable to} counter the^{plea taken by the applicantsas to non-compliance of} relevant^{provisionsunder the SecuritisationAct and the rules} thereunder. Under^{such circumstances,the contentionsremain} unrefuted and^{accordingly SA deserves to be allowed'}

¶21

In the result,^the SA is allowed by setting^{aside the actionof} sale notice dated^26.fl.2922^{In respect of SA} respondent Pursuant^to schedule^proPerty. /fr"'\

¶22

3 of3

¶23

SANo.342l2022

¶24

B. Consequently, interlocutory applications pending, if any, shall stand closed.

¶25

No order as to costs,

¶26

Communicate a copy of this order to the parties concerned.

¶27

(Dictated to the Steno, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in the open court on this the 22'd day of Oecember, 2023).

¶28

OW" fReMesHwnR^KorHE) PRESIDING OFFICER

Sarala Marelly v. the National Trust Housing Finance Limited

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sarala Marelly v. the National Trust Housing Finance Limited

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

Punjab National Bank versus M/s Jul Bricks Industry

State Bank of India versus Mr H Samuela

Canara Bank versus M/S M.K. Construction and Suppliers

Icici Bank Limited versus Sh. Rajinder Kumar Bareja

Union Bank of India versus M/S Daya International

Canara Bank versus Sri S. Hoysala