Dismissed

Ranganatha Traders v. Hdb Financial Service Ltd.

DRT9 Feb 2023SA/403/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an application challenging a Sale Notice issued for auction recovery, the Tribunal dismissed the application. The Court found no infirmities in the service procedure by the respondent bank and held the application infructuous as no sale had taken place due to lack of bidders.

What did the court decide?

SARFAESI Application No. 403 of 2022 dismissed without costs; all pending Interim/Appearance IAs closed.

Ranganatha Traders versus Hdb Financial Service Ltd. — Arbitration | DRT (2023)

¶1

¶2

S.A. 403 of 2022 09.02.2023

¶3

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHENNAI

¶4

Dated this the 9^th day of February, 2023

¶5

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

¶6

SARFAESI APPLICATION No. 403 of 2022

¶7

Ranganatha Traders, No.109, Nithiyanandam Street, Vasudeva Nagar, Jafferkhanpet, Chennai – 600 083. …Applicant

¶8

-Vs-

¶9

The Authorised Officer, M/s.HDB Financial Services Limited, No.68/2, 4^th Floor, Loyal Towers, Greams Road, Chennai – 600 006. ….Respondent

¶10

Counsels on record / appeared:

¶11

Counsel for Applicant : M/s. K.Thiyagarajan Counsel for Respondent : M/s.M.Ajmal Azzath

¶12

ORDER

¶13

This SA is filed challenging the Sale Notice dated 02.09.2022 issued by respondent bank scheduling sale to 07.10.2022, for recovery of a sum of Rs.3,92,42,459/-.

¶14

Heard Ld. Counsel appearing for respondent and perused records. It is the case of applicants that they availed Business Term Loan facility to the tune of Rs.3 crores from respondent bank and offered their immovable property as security for due repayment of loan thus availed. Though borrower was regular in repayment of

¶15

¶16

S.A. 403 of 2022 09.02.2023

¶17

installments without any delay or default, due to Pandemic Covid-19, they suffered loss in business and failed to honour the terms of sanction and committed default. Respondent bank had classified the loan account as NPA and issued statutory notices for recovery of their dues without following due process of law. Ld. counsel for applicant submitted that applicants are genuinely approaching respondent institution for a negotiated settlement and prayed time for the same.

¶18

Whereas Ld. Counsel for respondent submitted that the subject impugned sale notice dated 02.09.2022 is sent by post to applicants on the same day, however the same returned unserved with postal endorsement as ‘not delivered, addressee returned, left without instructions’. It is submitted that respondent institution has affixed the sale notice in the conspicuous place of the property on the same day and caused paper publication in two newspapers viz., ‘Dinamani’ and ‘The New Indian Express’ dated 02.09.2022 as warranted under law. Ld. Counsel for respondent submitted that there are no infirmities in the procedure adopted by the respondent while issuing the sale notice and that as no sale had taken place on the scheduled date for want of bidders and that this SA has become infructuous.

¶19

As applicant could not make out any tenable infirmities in the procedure adopted by the respondent institution while issuing the subject impugned sale notice and that no sale had taken place on the scheduled date for want of bidders, this SA is liable to be dismissed.

¶20

¶21

S.A. 403 of 2022 09.02.2023

¶22

Accordingly, this SA stands dismissed, however without costs. Interim stay, if

¶23

any granted and subsisting till this day stands vacated and all other IAs, if any pending

¶24

stand closed.

¶25

With the above directions, this SA stands disposed.

¶26

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

¶27

guidelines.

¶28

(Dictated to PS, transcribed by her, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in Open Court, on this the

¶29

09^th day of February, 2023)

¶30

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

Ranganatha Traders v. Hdb Financial Service Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ranganatha Traders v. Hdb Financial Service Ltd.

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

Paul Radje versus Rbl Bank Limited

C Janarthanan versus Union Bank of India

Mr S Purushothaman versus The a O Cholamandalam Investment And Finance Company Ltd.

Idbi Bank versus Devendiran

State Bank of India versus Amudha

Union Bank of India versus Subshini B