A Debt Recovery Tribunal dismissed an application where tenants claimed eviction was barred under the Tamil Nadu Rent Act based on an unregistered lease deed, holding such tenancy status insufficient to resist SARFAESI proceedings.
Dismissed the application and closed all pending interim applications (IA's).
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE DEBT RECOVERY TRIBUNAL –II CHENNAI Dated this 29th day of December, 2023
PRESENT: SHRI T.RAJESH PRESIDING OFFICER
S.A.489 of 2023
Chennai – 600 079.
Chennai – 600 079.
1
Chennai – 600 079.
Chennai – 600 079.
Chennai – 600 079.
Vs.
2
Counsel for Applicants : M/s.C.Kathirudayan. Counsel for Respondent : M/s.A.Karthikeyan.
…… ORDER
3. This Tribunal having gone into the so claimed Rent deed produced by the Applicants on 30.10.2023 issued notice to the respondent only to ascertain how much time can be granted to the Applicants to vacate the
premises. This is more so as law in this regard is no more “ Res integra ”
3
as the same is settled in “Bajarang Shyam Sundar Agarwal Vs. Central
Bank of India” reported in AIR 2019 SC 5017.
closed, no orders as to cost. Issue copies in accordance with Rule 16 of
the Debt Recovery Tribunal (procedure) Rules 1993.
(Dictated to PA, transcribed by him, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in the Open Court, this 29th day of December, 2023)
Sd./- (T.RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER DRT-II, CHENNAI
4
3 issues framed by the court
Whether Applicants claiming unregistered tenancy rights can resist enforcement measures under the SARFAESI Act.
Whether an unregistered lease deed confers a status stronger than a tenant in sufferance against bank recovery proceedings.
Whether the SARFAESI Act enforcement is additional to eviction orders under the Tamil Nadu Rent Act.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Bajarang Shyam Sundar Agarwal Vs. Central Bank of IndiaExplained¶3
AIR 2019 SC 5017 · Who else cites this
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Mr. Chandrakumar Varma and others
The Authorised Officer, City Union Bank and Mr. R. Murugadoss
T. Rajesh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
