Dismissed

M s Keerthana Automobiles v. Punjab National Bank

DRT29 Mar 2023SA/510/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Customer-applicants challenged a Sale Notice issued by the respondent bank under the SARFAESI Act for lack of procedural compliance and undervaluation. The Tribunal noted that no sale took place due to absence of bidders, rendering the sale notice infructuous, and dismissed the application as devoid of merits.

What did the court decide?

Sale Notice remains in force; application dismissed without costs; pending IAs closed.

M s Keerthana Automobiles versus Punjab National Bank — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2023)

¶1

¶2

S.A.510 of 2022 29.03.2023

¶3

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHENNAI

¶4

Dated this the 29^th day of March, 2023

¶5

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

¶6

SARFAESI APPLICATION No. 510 of 2022

¶7

M/s.Keerthana Automobiles Ground Floor, 80/1, GST Road, Chrompet, Chennai – 600 044.

¶8

Mrs.J.Usha, Proprietor: Keerthana Automobiles, No.5/41, 16^th Cross Street, New Colony, Chrompet, Chennai – 600 044.

¶9

Mr.L.Jaishankar, No.5/41, 16^th Cross Street, New Colony, Chrompet, Chennai – 600 044. ….Applicants

¶10

Vs.

¶11

The Authorised Officer Punjab National Bank, Circle Sastra Centre, No.769, Spencer Plaza, 2^nd Floor, Anna Salai, Chennai – 600 002. Rep. by its Chief Manager ….Respondent

¶12

Counsels on record / appeared:

¶13

Counsel for Applicant : M/s.N.S.Thanu Madhan. Counsel for Respondent : M/s.Rahul Jain.

¶14

¶15

S.A.510 of 2022 29.03.2023

¶16

ORDER

¶17

This SA is filed challenging the Sale Notice dated 02.11.2022 issued by respondent bank scheduling sale to 08.12.2022 for recovery of a sum of Rs.15,62,666.54p.

¶18

Heard Ld. Counsels appearing for the respective parties.

¶19

It is the case of applicant that they had availed three different loans from the respondent bank and mortgaged their property against which SARFAESI action is initiated by the respondent bank and the impugned sale notice is challenged in the present SA. It is the case of applicant that respondent bank has not followed the procedure as warranted under law and that the possession notice was served subsequent to the affixture and paper publication and therefore there is a violation of the procedure. Ld. counsel for applicant also submitted that the valuation of the property is grossly low and is not evidencing the subsisting value of the property. Notwithstanding the above contentions, it is the case of applicant that they have been consistently making payments, which are although reflected in their statement of account, were not admitted in their claim against the applicant. Ld. counsel reiterates that owing to the same, the claim made in the sale notice is not in accordance to the actual outstanding due and that the amount to be discharged to the respondent bank is much less than the amount claimed in the sale notice, owing to which also the procedure adopted by the respondent bank is bad in law. Ld. counsel for applicant had relied upon a judgment of Hon’ble High Court of Madras with regard to the service of possession notice as was

¶20

¶21

S.A.510 of 2022 29.03.2023

¶22

enclosed in their typed set of documents. Submitting so, Ld. counsel for applicant prayed for setting aside the sale notice and prayed to allow their SA.

¶23

Whereas Ld. counsel for respondent bank has submitted that respondent bank had followed the procedure tooth and nail as warranted under law and has demonstrated the same through their counter and typed set of documents. Ld. counsel has reiterated that the possession notice is sent to the borrowers on 11.05.2022 instance as warranted under law and the contention of the Ld. counsel for applicant that it has been served on 13.05.2022, which is subsequent to the date of possession notice being 11.05.2022, does not hold much water as the service is initiated on 11.05.2022 instance and therefore the contentions and reliance on the judgment of Hon’ble High Court of Madras with regard to the possession of the property will not be applicable to the facts of the present case. Ld. counsel further submitted that respondent bank had approached Ld.CJM court, seeking assistance for taking physical possession of the property, which is since ordered and also delivered to the respondent bank herein and submits that the sale notice is issued only subsequent to taking physical possession of the property. Ld. counsel submits that the amount sporadically claimed to have been paid by the borrowers is not sufficient either for regularising the loan account or for bringing the account from within the purview of NPA. Applicant / borrower has not caused any payment even after approaching this Tribunal but has only challenged the sale notice where sale did not take place and hence the very sale notice has become infructuous. Submitting so, Ld. counsel has prayed for appropriate orders.

¶24

¶25

S.A.510 of 2022 29.03.2023

¶26

Both the parties admit that no sale has taken place on the scheduled date for want of bidders and that the sale notice has become infructuous.

¶27

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 even otherwise since no sale had taken place on the scheduled date for want of bidders, the present SA is devoid of merits and hence the same is liable to be dismissed.

¶28

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.

¶29

With the above directions, this SA stands disposed.

¶30

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

¶31

guidelines.

¶32

(Dictated to PS, transcribed by her, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in Open Court, on this the 29^th day of March, 2023)

¶33

Sd/-

¶34

(GANAPATHI K.R.K) PRESIDING OFFICER

M s Keerthana Automobiles v. Punjab National Bank

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M s Keerthana Automobiles v. Punjab National Bank

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

Vinothkukmar Kolamani versus Fincare Small Finance Bank Ltd.

South Indian Bank versus Skr Trading

A Elumalai versus Vistaar Financial Services Pvt. Ltd.

The Cosmos Co. Operative Bank Limited versus Dr Parthasarathy Memorial Hospital

R Dhanalakshmi versus Edelweiss Asset Reconstruction Company Limited

Mr N Senthil Kumar versus M s Repco Home Finance Ltd.