Dismissed

D Ramachandran v. City Union Bank Limited

DRT21 Apr 2023SA/445/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This SARFAESI application challenging a post-sale auction of mortgaged property was dismissed by the Tribunal. The Bench found no tenable infirmities in the sale procedure commenced by the secured creditor, noting that the sale was concluded, possession given, and the sale certificate issued.

What did the court decide?

SA dismissed without costs; applicant permitted to reconcile with auction purchaser.

D Ramachandran versus City Union Bank Limited — Land Acquisition | DRT (2023)

¶1

¶2

S.A.445 of 2022 21.04.2023

¶3

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHENNAI

¶4

Dated this the 21^st day of April, 2023

¶5

Present: Shri Ganapathi K.R.K.

¶6

Presiding Officer

¶7

SARFAESI APPLICATION No. 445 of 2022

¶8

Mr. D. Ramachandran., S/o.M.Dhanapal, New No.83/2, Old No.71/2, Kancheepuram High Road, Chengalpet – 603 001. ….Applicant

¶9

Vs.

¶10

Asset City Union Bank Limited, Administrative Office, No.24-B, Gandhi Nagar, Kumbakonam – 612 001.

¶11

A.Kanthimathinathan, S/o.Athinathan, No.288 A/4, 2^nd Street, MGR Nagar, Chengalpattu – 603 001. ….Respondents

¶12

Counsels on record / appeared:

¶13

Counsel for Applicant : M/s.K.Kathiresan. Counsel for 1^st Respondent : M/s.A.Karthikeyan. Counsel for 2^nd Respondent : M/s.M.Tharanipathi.

¶14

ORDER

¶15

This SA is filed challenging the sale conducted on 14.09.2022 pursuant to Sale

¶16

Notice dated 26.08.2022 published in Deccan chronicle on 27.08.2022 by respondent

¶17

bank, for recovery of a sum of Rs.42,01,463/-.

¶18

Heard Ld. counsels appearing for the respective parties.

¶19

¶20

S.A.445 of 2022 21.04.2023

¶21

It is the case of applicant that he had initiated the present challenge aggrieved by the sale concluded on 14.09.2022 made by secured creditor / first respondent bank herein. It is the case of applicant that he intended to negotiate with respondent bank as well as auction purchaser for retaining his property, however, could not do so due to paucity of funds. Ld. counsel for applicant submits that it is the endeavour of applicant to negotiate with auction purchaser to retain his property. Ld. counsel for applicant submitting so had prayed further time.

¶22

Whereas Ld. counsel for first respondent bank had put up appearance and filed their counter and typed set of documents evidencing their actions. Ld. counsel for respondent bank had demonstrated their actions through the typed set of documents. Dates and events together with written submissions are also filed on behalf of first respondent bank after serving copies on the other side. Ld. counsel for first respondent bank has submitted that there are no infirmities in the procedure adopted by the respondent bank while concluding its actions under SARFAESI and also submitted that applicant could not make out any infirmities calling for any interference by this Tribunal. It is also submitted that as the sale is concluded, auction purchaser has deposited the entire amount and sale certificate is also duly issued and registered in accordance to law. Ld. counsel further submitted that pursuant to an order from Ld. CJM, Chengalpet, physical delivery of possession of the property is also handed over to auction purchaser and therefore nothing survives in the present challenge.

¶23

Ld. counsel for R-2 is also present and filed their written submissions after serving copies on the other side. Ld. counsel submits that auction purchaser has

¶24

¶25

S.A.445 of 2022 21.04.2023

¶26

followed the procedure as stated in the sale notice, under which the sale is concluded on 14.09.2022. Ld. counsel further submits that auction purchaser is in absolute physical possession and enjoyment of the property and also that sale certificate is duly registered, which concludes the sale process. Submitting so, Ld. counsel prayed for appropriate orders.

¶27

In the circumstances, as there are no tenable infirmities that could be established by the applicant while laying a challenge to the concluded sale on 14.09.2022, there are no merits in the present appeal and the same is liable to be dismissed.

¶28

Accordingly, 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. Applicant is permitted to explore his possibilities and reconcile with the auction purchaser in terms of his submissions before the Bench.

¶29

With the above directions, this SA stands disposed

¶30

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

¶31

(Dictated to PS, transcribed by her, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in Open Court, on this the 21^st day of April, 2023)

¶32

Sd/-

¶33

(GANAPATHI K.R.K)

¶34

PRESIDING OFFICER

D Ramachandran v. City Union Bank Limited

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

D Ramachandran v. City Union Bank Limited

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

S Dhanraj versus Yes Bank

S Punithavel versus Yes Bank

I Yaseen versus Indian Bank

Ravanan versus Sundaram Home Finace Limited

J Hemalatha versus Bank of India

Premier Distilleries Pvt. Ltd. versus Dbs Bank Limited