Dismissed

Amaravathy v. State Bank of India

DRT18 Apr 2023SA/39/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this SA filed challenging a sale notice, the Tribunal addressed the applicant's locus standi as a successor. Finding no tenable infirmities in the bank's procedure and noting compliance with interim conditions preventing sale, the Tribunal dismissed the application.

What did the court decide?

SA dismissed without costs; interim orders vacated; pending IAs closed.

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

¶1

¶2

S.A.39 of 2023 18.04.2023

¶3

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHENNAI

¶4

Dated this the 18^th day of April, 2023

¶5

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

¶6

SARFAESI APPLICATION No. 39 of 2023

¶7

Mrs.Amaravathy, W/o.Late. Mr.Ranganathan 136D/19, 3^rd Cross Street, V O C Nagar, Kallakurichi – 606 202. ….Applicant

¶8

Vs.

¶9

The Authorised Officer, State Bank of India, Stressed Assets Recovery Branch, 2^nd Floor, Indian Red Cross Buildings, No.32, Montieth Road, Egmore, Chennai – 600 008. ….Respondent

¶10

Counsels on record / appeared:

¶11

Counsel for Applicant : M/s.Rahuman. Counsel for Respondent : M/s.S.Ambalavannan.

¶12

ORDER

¶13

This SA is filed challenging the Sale Notice dated 21.12.2022 issued by

¶14

respondent bank scheduling sale to 30.01.2023 for recovery of a sum of Rs.55,09,300/-.

¶15

Respondent bank filed counter and typed set of documents evidencing the action

¶16

taken by them under the Act.

¶17

Heard Ld. counsels appearing for the respective parties.

¶18

¶19

S.A.39 of 2023 18.04.2023

¶20

It is the case of applicant that she is a third party to the proceedings, but however, submits that she is an interested party, claiming her right under succession of her deceased daughter. Ld. counsel for applicant submits that with a day’s delay, both the interim conditions imposed by this Tribunal are duly complied and therefore no sale has taken place. Ld. counsel has also submitted that respondent bank has issued yet another sale notice subsequent to the impugned sale notice and prayed for appropriate orders.

¶21

Whereas, respondent bank through its counsel has filed its counter and typed set of documents evidencing their actions. Ld. counsel has vehemently opposed applicant’s locus for filing the present SA. Ld. counsel has relied upon Section 15(1) of the Hindu Succession Act, where the property in the name of a deceased married female would devolve upon her children first and then her husband and after them to her in-laws and later remaining portion, if any, might be claimed by the mother, like is being claimed in the present SA. Ld. counsel further submits that husband of the principal borrower, is the co-borrower, who is very much alive and has not challenged the actions of the respondent bank since they are not aggrieved with the actions of the bank and that they are aware of the default committed to the respondent bank. Ld. counsel has demonstrated the actions of the respondent bank while issuing the impugned sale notice, through their counter and typed set of documents. Ld. counsel further submits that there are no infirmities in the procedure adopted by the respondent bank while issuing the impugned sale notice and even otherwise, sale notice has become infructuous for want of bidders and also as no sale had taken place.

¶22

¶23

S.A.39 of 2023 18.04.2023

¶24

In the circumstances, as applicant could not make out any tenable infirmities in the procedure adopted by the respondent bank while issuing the impugned sale notice and also in view of the compliance of interim conditions by the applicant herein, no sale had taken place and thus the impugned sale notice has become infructuous.

¶25

For the said reason, there are no merits in the present SA and the same is liable to be dismissed.

¶26

Accordingly, this SA stands dismissed, however without costs. Interim order, if any granted and subsisting till this day stands vacated and all other IAs, if any pending stand closed. Parties will be at liberty to agitate upon their rights in accordance to law.

¶27

With the above directions, this SA stands disposed.

¶28

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

¶29

(Dictated to PS, transcribed by her, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in Open Court, on this the 18^th day of April, 2023)

¶30

Sd/- (GANAPATHI K.R.K) PRESIDING OFFICER

Amaravathy v. State Bank of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Amaravathy v. State Bank of India

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

V N Subramaniyan versus Indian Bank

T S Dinadayalan versus Tamilnad Mercantile Bank Limited

Vedha Selin Booma Kanagaraj Ambujam D o Kanagaraj versus Punjab and Sind Bank

Karthikeyan P versus Axis Bank

Punjab and Sind Bank versus Arikrishnan

Mrs Lakshmi Prabha versus Indian Bank