Allowed

Mr Gajendra M v. Karnataka Bank Limited

DRT22 Nov 2023SA/745/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal quashed a sale of mortgaged property conducted by the bank, holding it null and void due to mandatory procedural violations: sale occurred before the expiry of the 30-day notice period and the bank failed to prove affixation of the sale notice on the property.

What did the court decide?

Sale notice dated 19.10.2022 and the sale held on 10.11.2022 declared null and void; recourses taken are set aside; defendant directed to enforce security interest afresh in accordance with law.

Mr Gajendra M versus Karnataka Bank Limited — Execution and Attachment | DRT (2023)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBI-INAL - I, KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶2

PRESENT: SRI IMTI AZ ALT

¶3

PRESIDING OFFICER

¶4

Dated the22"d day of November,2}23

¶5

SECURITISATION APPLICATION NO. 745 OF 2022

¶6

Between

¶7

l. Gajendra M, S/o Muniswamy Muniraju, 520, 5th Cross, Mahalakshmi Layout, Raj aj inagar, B angalore, Karnataka - 560010.

¶8

Sumithra, Wo Gajendra M, 520, 5th Cross, Mahalakshmi Layout, Raj aj inagar, Bangalore, Karnataka- 560010. ...Applicants

¶9

And

¶10

The authorised officer, Karnataka Bank Limited, Asset Recovery Management Branch, ' l't Floor, FKCCI Building, Kempegowda Road, ...... Defendant Bangalore, Karnataka - 560009.

¶11

This Securitisation Application having been heard on 22.02.2023 in the presence

¶12

of Advocates IWs A.S Nanjundappa, Rekha B.S and Soumya C N for the applicants, and the defendant being absent, and stood over to this day for consideration, the Tribunal delivered the following:-

¶13

FINAL ORDER

¶14

¶15

The applicants filed the above Securitisation Application (SA) on 04.11.2022 under S.17(l) of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 asamended from time to time - hereinafter referred to as 'the Act' - praying to set aside the sale notice dated 19.10.2022.^The applicants are none other than the borrowers of a financial assistance availed^fromthe Karnataka Bank Limited.

¶16

sA745/2022

¶17

The case set out by the applicants in the SA in brief is as follows:- The applicants are the borrowers of a loan availed from the Karnataka Bank Limited. The defendant issued demand notice dated 16.11.2021 but the classification of the account before the period of 90 days as non-performing asset is illegal. The said demand notice was not served to the applicants either by direct delivery or affixture. The possession notice also not served on the same day but received by post. The said notice is not affixed or published. The said possession notice is not signed by the authorised officer. The schedule immovable property is not legally and validly mortgaged to the bank. Documents are not duly stamped as per the Karnataka Stamp Act and thus inadmissible in evidence. The security interest created over the secured assets has not been registered with the Central Registry and thus the defendant is not entitled to enforce its security interest over the schedule immovable property. No valuation of the property is taken before fixing the reserve price of the schedule immovable property. The valuation done is not intimated to the applicants and the reserve price was fixed not in consultation with the applicants. No 30 days' notice has been served on the applicants. The same has not been affixed. Exorbitant interest has been charged on the account. Penal interest has been charged. On the above contentions, the applicants prayed for setting aside the sale notice dated 19.10.2022.

¶18

¶19

The defendant filed statement of objection contending as follows:- The application is not maintainable. The applicants on 04.04.2015 availed a term loan of <78.75 lakhs for construction of building on the schedule immovable property on duly executing the necessary loan security documents and creating equitable mortgage over the schedule immovable property in favour of the bank. The said term loan was to be repaid in 240 equated monthly instalments of t79,9501- each. The applicants failed to repay the above loan in spite of repeated requests and demands made and hence the loan was classified as non-performing asset on 31.03.2021as per the Reserve Bank of :::rr,

¶20

sA:t4512022

¶21

India guidelines. Thereafter, the defendant issued demand notice dated 16.11.2021, which was sent to them by registered post on 17. ll.202l and the same was duly served on them. The applicants having failed to respond to the demand notice, the defendant issued possession notice dated 03.03.2022, which also was duly served on the applicants by registered post. In furtherance thereof, the reserve price of the schedule immovable property was fixed at11,17,65,000/- and a public notice of sale dated 18.10.2022has been issued fixing the date of opening the tenders on 10.1 1.2022. The property was sold for {1,18,15,000/-. The purchaser remitted the full amount of sale price and a sale certificate dated 1I.01.2023 was issued. The creation of the said security interest was registered with the Central Registry. On these contentions, the defendant prayed for dismissal of the SA.

¶22

The applicants produced three documents along with the SA. For convenience, they are referred to as Annexures A1 to A3. Similarly, the defendant produced twenty four documents along with the statement of objection, which are for convenience referred to as Annexures Bl to B24. However, it was desirable for the defendant bank to produce the originals of postal receipts, postal acknowledgement cards, photograph, report of affixture, dailies etc before this Tribunal instead of producing the evidences in piecemeal.

¶23

On the appreciation of the rival contentions, the only issue arises for consideration is as to whether the applicants are entitled to the relief prayed for?

¶24

This Tribunal would like to make a passive remark that the bank for whom the authorised officer invoked the provisions under the Act has not been made a party in thq cause title to the SA. The right to sue accrues under S.17(1) of the Act to any person (including borrower) if he is aggrieved by any of the measures referred to in sub-section (a) of S.l3 of the Act taken by the secured creditor or his authorised officer under the ," secured creditor is a creditor holding security the realisation of which would :::

¶25

sA745t2022

¶26

¶27

satisfy his claim. 5.13(12) of the Act says that the right of the secured creditor can be exercised by one or more of his officers authorised in the manner as may be prescribed. 'Authorised officer' under R.2(a) of the Security Interest^{(Enforcement)} Rules, 2002^(as amended from time to time) - for short'the Rules' - is an officer of the secured creditor who is competent to exercise the rights of the secured creditor and also the right of the creditor secured under the Act to exercise power in respect to and also any other right of the secured creditor conferred under the Act. In the instant case, the secured creditor being a banking company, it can only be represented by its principal officer. On the showing of the applicants itself, they are aggrieved by Annexures A1 to ,{3 notices issued by the authorised officer of the banking company, who does not have an independent status without the existence of the secured creditor. Therefore, in the opinion of the Tribunal, the secured creditor should also have been made a party in the cause title along with the authorised officer. For convenience and easy reference, the Karnataka Bank Limited is referred to as 'the defendant bank'.

¶28

The issue:- Admittedly, the applicants are the borrowers of a loan availed from the Karnataka Bank Limited and the defendant issued demand notice dated 16.11.2021 but, according to the applicants, the classification of the account before the period of 90 days as non-performing asset is illegal. Per contra, it is the submission of the defendant that the applicants on 04.04.2015 availed a term loan of <78.75 lakhs for construction of building on the schedule immovable property on duly executing the necessary loan security documents and creating equitable mortgage over the schedule immovable property in favour of the bank and the said term loan was to be repaid in 240 equated monthly instalments of 179,9501- each. According to the defendant, the applicants failed to repay the above loan in spite of repeated requests and demands made and hence the loan account was classified as non-performing asset on 31.03.2021 as per the Reserve Bank of India guidelines.

sl^745/2022

,8. Annexure B1 is a copy of the sanction letter issued by the defendant bank to the applicants advising them sanction of term loan of {78.75 lakhs^granted as housing loan in the non-priority sector, which was to be repaid in 240 equated monthly instalments of t79,9501- each. Annexure 82 is a copy of the term loan agreement executed by the applicants in favour of the defendant bank for due repayment of the amounts availed. Annexure 83 is a copy of the memorandum of deposit of title deeds executed by the I't applicant in favour of the defendant bank creating equitable mortgage over the schedule immovable property by deposit of title deeds relating thereto. Annexure A1'(Annexure 85) is a copy of the demand notice issued under 5.13(2) of the Act by the defendant addressed to the applicants calling upon them to discharge the debt of <78,83,213.14 as on 15.11.2021within sixty days from the date of receipt of such notice. It is specifically stated therein that on account of the failure of the applicants to repay the dues as is required, the bank in terms of the Reserve Bank of India guidelines as to the income recognition and prudential accounting norms classified the account as nonperforming asset on 3l .03.2021 with effect from 03.01 .2021 .

¶33

The applicants have no case that at any point of time even after issuance of Annexure A1 (Annexure 85) demand notice they had regularised the account by paying off the irregular portion of interest and the principal portion under such loans. They have no case that the operation of the account was not irregular as on 31.03.2021 when the account was classified as non-performing asset. The applicants have no case that they had strictly complied with the terms and conditions of Annexure Bl sanction. They have also no case that they had responded to Annexure A1 (Annexure 85) notice and had regularised the account. As per the definition under clause O in S.2 of the Act, default means non-payment of any debt and as per clause (o) non-performing asset means an asset or account of a borrower which has been classified by a bank or financial institution as sub-standard, doubtful or loss asset, and they read as below:-

¶34

sA74512022

¶35

"(j) default meqns-

¶36

, (i) non-payment ofany debt or any other amount poyable by the borrower to any secured creditor consequent upon which the account of such borrower is classified as non-performing asset in the bool<s of account ofthe secured creditor; or

¶37

(ii) non-payment of any debt or any other amount pqyqble by the borrower with respect tort debt securities after notice of ninety days demanding pqyment of dues served upon such borrower by the debenture trustee or any other aulhority in whose favour security interest is created for the benefit of holders ofthe such debt securities.

¶38

(o) non-performing asset meqns^qn asset or occount of a borrower, which has been classified by a bank or financial institution as sub-standard, doubtful or loss assel,-

¶39

(a) in case such bqnk or financial institution is adminislered or regulated by any authority or body established, constituted or appointed by any law .for the lime being in fore, in^qccordance with the directions or guidelines relating lo assels classifications issued by such authority or body; (b) in any other case, in accordonce with the direclions or guidelines relating to assets classifications issued by the Resene Bank."

¶40

As per the explanation given in the Act, the word 'non-performing asset' is i colourable substitute for'bad debt' about which there is no reasonable expectation of recovery. Though the applicants have referred to the Master Circular dated 17.07.2004 of the Reserve Bank of India, they have not produced the same before this Tribunal. The Reserve Bank of India's prudential norns on asset classification defines a 'nonperforming asset as'a credit facility in respect of which the interest and or instalment of principal has remained past due' for a specified period of time. As per the guidelines issued by the Reserve Bank of India, with effect from 31.03.2004 an account can be classified as non-performing asset if the interest and/or instalment of principal remain overdue for a period of more than ninety days in an account in respect of a term loan; the account remains 'out of order' for a period of more than 90 days in respect of an overdraft/cash credit limit and the bill remains overdue for a period of 90 days in the case of bills purchase and discounted. An asset, including a leased asset, becomes nonperforming asset when it ceases to generate income for a bank. Any amount due to bank under any credit facility is 'overdue' if it is not paid on the due date fixed by the bank. The applicants have no case that these facts are not applicable to their accounts in question. Therefore, there is no lawful point in contending that the account had not

¶41

¶42

sA745t2022

¶43

become non-performing assets and the^{defendant bank had declaredthe accountas non-} performing asset contrary to the^guidelines issued by^{the ReserveBank of India.}

¶44

I 1. It is also the contention of the applicants^{that the said demand notice was} not served to them either by direct^{delivery or affixture and the possessionnoticealso not} served on the same day but^{receivedby post and the said notice is not affixed or} published and the said possession^notice is^{not signed by the authorised officer.} According to the defendant,^{he issued demand notice dated16.11.2021, which was sent} to them by registered^{poston 17.ll.202l andthe same was duly served on themand the} applicants having failed to^{respondto the demandnotice, he issued possession notice} dated 03.03 .2022,^{whichalso was dulyservedon them by registered post'}

¶45

Annexure B6 is copies^{of postal receipts for havingsent AnnexureAl} (Annexure 85) demand notice by registered^{post on 17.11.2021to the applicants.} Annexures 87 and 88^{are the postal acknowledgementcardssigned by the applicantsfor} having received the same.^{AnnexureA2 (Annexure89) is a copyof the possessionnotice} issued by the defendant^{under S.13(4)of the Act in respect of the schedule immovable} property. Annexure Bl0 shows^{thatthe said notice had been sent to the applicantsby} registered post on 05.03.2022.^{Annexures811 and B12are the postal acknowledgement} cards signed by the^{applicantsfor having received the same on 08,03.2022.ltis the case} of the applicants that^{they werenot servedwith a possessionnotice on the same day but} served with by registered^{post only.}

¶46

Sub-section⁽⁴⁾ of^{S.13 of the Act dealswith the recoursescould be taken} by the secured creditor^{in case the borrower fails to dischargehis liability in full within} the specified^{period in the noticeissued under sub-section (2), andit reads thus:-}

¶47

,,@) In case the borrowerfails to discharge his liability infull within the period specified in sub' section^(Z)i,ihe secured creditor,riy^{take recourseto one or more of thefollowing measures to recover his} secured debt,^namely:-

¶48

¶49

(a) takepossessionofthesecuredassetsoftheborrowerincludingtherighttotransferbywayof ,:::, ^t,rr*ent or salefor reatising^{thesecureasset;}

¶50

sA745t2022

¶51

(b) take over the management of the business of the borrower including the right to transfer by way of lease, assignment or salefor realising the secured asset:

¶52

PROVIDED that the right to transfer by *ay of lease, assignment or sale shall be exercised only where the substanlial part of the business of the borrower is held as security.for the debt:

¶53

PROVIDED FURTHER that where the monagement of^,,vhole of the business or part of the business is severable, the secured creditor shall take over lhe management of such business of the borrower, which is relqtable to the security or the debt.

¶54

(c) appoint^qny person (hereafter referred to as the ntanager), to manage the secured assets the possession ofwhich has been taken over by the secured credilor;

¶55

(d) require at any time by notice in writing, any person who has acquired any of the secured assetsfrom the borrower andfromwhom any money is due or ntay beconte due to the borrower, to pqy the secured creditor, so much of the money as is suffcient to pay the secured debt.^"

¶56

Sub-rules (1) and (2) of R.8 of the Rules deals with the rnode of delivering

¶57

the possession notice and it reads thus:-

¶58

"(l) lYhere the secured osset is an immovable property, the authorised ofjicer shqll take or cause to be taken possession, by delivering a^possession notice^prepared as^{nearly as possible in Appendix-lVto} these rules, to the borrower and by affixing the^possession notice on the^{outer dooror at such conspicuous} place ofthe property.

¶59

possible , (2) but in The any possession case not later notice as referred than seven days to in from sub-rule the date (l) of shall taking also^possession, be published, as soon in two leadingas newspapers, one in vernacular language having sufficient circulationⁱⁿ lhat locality,^{by the authorised} fficer.

¶60

(2A) All notices under these rules may also be served upon the borrower through electronic^mode of service, in addition to the modes^prescribed under^{sub-rule (1) and sub-rule (2) of rule 8."}

¶61

The provisions under the Act or the Rules do not say that^the said^notice had to be delivered on the same day itself. Annexure^{B13 is the copy of the photograph} showing the affixture of Annexure A2^{(Annexure 89) possessionnotice dated 03.03.2022} on the same day itself at 02.48^{p.m. Annexure B14is a copy of the extractof publication} of Annexure A2^(Annexure 89)^{possessionnoticein Englishin NewsTrail daily dated} 06:03.2022. Annexure 815 is a copy of the^extract of^{publicationof Annexure ,{2} (Annexure 89) possession notice in Kannada in Vishwa Vani daily dated^06.03.2022. Therefore, the publication has been done by the defendant^{in terms of sr"rb-rule(2) of R.8} of the Rules.

¶62

A perusal of Annexure A2^{(Annexure89) possessionnoticeshows that} the same has been signed by^{the authorised officer. An officernot below the rank of} Chief Manager of the secured^{creditorcannot be appointedas its authorisedofficer. The} appointment of authorised officer is^{only a designated post and he is not removedfrom}

¶63

sA745t2022

¶64

his parent post in the secured creditor. Therefore, there^{is no impedimentin using his} official designation as well his designated designation in^{such notices. The definition of} 'authorised officer' under R.2(a) of the Rules takes^{in an officer not less than the rank of} a Qhief Manager of a^public sector bank or^{equivalent, as specifiedby the Boardof} Directors or Board of Trustees of the secured^{creditoror any other personor authority} exercising powers of superintendence,^{directionand control of the business or affairs of} the secured creditor, as the case^{may be, to exercise the rightsof a secured creditor.} Therefore, the 'authorised officer' does not^{lose the character of Chief Manager. The} delegated power is in addition to the official^{designation.The sameperson is exercising} the charge of Chief Manager^{whereasat the sametime he is carrying on his delegated} charge also. There is no such^{post as 'authorisedofficer' in any bank or financial} institution, which is only^{a persona designatagranted to an officer not below the rank of a} Chief Manager. Therefore,^{he is entitledto use both the designations.}

¶65

Yet another contention^{raised by the applicants is that the schedule} immovable property is not^{legally and validly mortgagedto the bank and the documents} are not duly stamped as^{per the Kamataka Stamp Actand thus inadmissible in evidence.} Annexure 83 is a copy of the^{memorandumof deposit of title deeds executed on} Og.O4.2Ol5 by the l't^{applicant in favour of the defendantbank creating equitable} mortgage over the schedule^{immovable property by deposit of original title deedsrelating} to it as collateral security^{for due repaymentof the credit limitsaggregatingto the sum of} <7B.75lakhs availed by the^{borrowers.Annexure 83 is registeredwith SRO, Rajajinagar} bearing No.205.

¶66

5.58(0 of the^{Transfer of PropertyAct, 1882 deals withmortgage by}

¶67

deposit of title deeds and^{it reads so:-}

¶68

"Where q person in any of the following towns, namely, the lowns of^{Calcutta, Madrasand} Bombay, and in any other^{town, whichthe State Government concerned may, by notification in the Official} Gazette, specifu in^{this behalf, delivers to a creditor or his agent documentsof titleto immovableproperty,} n-ireate a security^{thereon, the transactionis calleda mortgage by deposit of title deeds."} :::*rr;

sA745t2022

From the above, it is clear that what necessary to create an equitable mortgage by deposit of title deeds is that delivery of documents of title to immovable property with intent to create a security thereon. It was held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in United Bank of India Ltd. v. Messrs Lekharam Sonaram and Co. & others [tEorted^{in AIR 1965 SC 1591Jthat when the debtor deposits with the creditortitle} deeds of his property with intent to create a security, the law implies a contract between the parties to create a mortgage and no registered instrument is required under S.59 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882 as in other classes of rnortgage, and that the essence of a mortgage by deposit of title deeds is the actual handing over by a borrower to the lender of documents of title to immovable property with the intention that those documents shall constitute a security which will enable the creditor ultimately to recover the money which he has lent. It was further affirmed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in State^qf Harytana^v Na\tir Singh [reported in 2013 4t KLT 207^(SC)Jthat when debtor deposits^with creditor title deeds of^property for^purpose of security, it^{becomes mortgage in terms} of^S.58(f) and no registered instrument is required under S.59^{thereof as in othercasesof mortgage.} The Hon'ble High Court of Kerala in Biju Paul v^{Nedungadi Bank Ltd} freported^{in 20]2} Qt KLT SN I l3^{(C.No. I 10.t1 has held that in order to createa valid equitable mortgage by} deposit of title deeds, some documents^{showing evidenceof title must be deposited with} the mortgagee with the intention to create^{a security for the debt. It was further held by} the Hon'ble High Court of Kerala in South Indian^{Bank Limitedv Ramachandran} [reported^{in 2017 (21 KLT 705 : ILR 2017(2\ Kerala 900 : 2017 (2) KHC998 :} MANU/KE/L724/20171thatⁱⁿ order^{to create a mortgageby depositof title deeds, all that} is necessary is a mere handing over of title^{deeds with the intent to createmortgage over} the property.

¶73

¶74

The word 'mortgage' is defined under^{S.58 of the Transferof Property}

¶75

,882 as'a mortgage is the transfer^{of an interestin specific immovable property for} :::

¶76

¶77

sA745t2022

¶78

the purpose of securing the payment of money advanced or to be advanced by way of loan, an existing or further debt, or the performance of an engagement which may give rise to a pecuniary liability'. It is the specific case of the applicants that the schedule immovable property is not legally mortgaged to the defendant bank and hence the defendant is not entitled to enforce the security interest over the same. While creating a mortgage by deposit of title deeds, possession over the immovable property need not be handed over to the mortgagee by the mortgagor but what should be delivered is the title deed relating to the same. Law does not promote any registered deed holder to^go without any title over the same. In India, as^per the^provisions of the Transfer of Property^Act, 1882, there should be a registered owner for each and every^property, otherwise, the^same would belong to the Government. In the above circumstances^{and on the appreciationof} evidences adduced by both sides, it^{goeswithoutsaythat the mortgagorhas transferred} the interest on such immovable^property for^{the purpose of securing the loans availed by} the principal borrowers from the defendant^{bank.In the above facts and circumstances of} the case, the schedule immovable^{property is, in fact, the secured asset of the defendant} bank and the defendant authorised^{officerhas every right to enforcethe security interest} over the same. The contention^{raised in contra by the applicants is only to be rejected.}

¶79

¶80

It is also the contention of the^{applicants that there is evasionof stamp} duty by the bank on mortgage^{deeds got executedand, therefore, these documentsare} inadmissible in evidence. It may be^{noted that no adjudicatory power relating to the debt} claimed by the defendant bank^{has beengivento this Tribunal under the Act. Whatto be} considered by this Tribunal^{in an application filed underS.17(l) of the Actis to verifyas} to whether any of the measures^{referredto in sub-section(4) of S.13 of the Acttaken by} the secured creditor or his authorised^{officer for enfbrcementof security interest over the} secured asset are in accordance^{with the provisions of the Act and the Rules made} thereunder. A^perusal of^{Annexure 83 memorandumof deposit of title deed shows that}

¶81

¶82

sA745/2022

¶83

the stamp duty of <15,750/- for registration of the same has been remitted by the defendant bank by way of DD No.649589 and 649591dated 06.04.2015 on behalf of the beneficiary, the I't applicant. The defendant bank will debit such amount from the account of the I't applicant. Therefore, eventually such amount is to be borne bythe l't applicant only. This is where the maxim 'Nul prendra advantage de son tort demesne' comes in. No one can take advantage of his own wrong. Especially, a debtor cannot be allowed to take advantage of his own default to deny creditor to exercise his legitimate statutory right. If there is any undervaluation, the applicants are^free to^{report the sameto} the registering authority, who is conferred with^power to^{take remedial action. No} original document has been produced before this Tribunal by^{eitherside. Therefore,the} question of admissibility of evidence and impounding of^{the same doesnot arise at all in} a proceedings in an application^{filed under S.l7(1)of the Act before this Tribunal.}

¶84

¶85

The applicants taking it as a 'mortgage deed'^{have contended that the levy} of stamp duty comes under Art.34 of the^{Karnataka Stamp Act, 1957. The word} 'mortgage deed' as defined under S.2(1)(n) of^{the Karnataka Stamp Act, 1957includes} every instrument whereby, for the^{purposeof securing money advanced, or to be} advanced, by way of loan, or an^{existingor future debt, or the performanceof an} engagement, one^person transfers,^{or creates, to or in favour of, another,a rightover or in} respect of specified^{property. Annexure83 is a letter evidencing deposit of titledeeds} whereby the loan availed by^{the bonowerwassecured. Unless the document was one} which for the purpose of money^{advancedor to be advancedtransfersor creates in favour} of another^person a right^{over in respectof a specified immovable property,it cannot be} regarded as an instrument of^{mortgagedeed within the arrnpit of S.2(1Xn). By virtue of} Annexure B3 the executant^{was only placingon record that the title deeds already} deposited with the bank^{branch (as per the list therein)withan intention to createsecurity} of equitable mortgage^{was only to secure the creditfacilitygranted or to be} :_*u,

sA745/2022

granted to the applicants. Therefore, the same is not an instrument of mortgage deed but only a letter placing on record the fact of deposit of title deeds which had already been done earlier. No title right over the property was transferred or created by placing such fact but only created a security interest over the same in favour of the defendant bank. It is well settled that such letter need not be registered at all. What obvious by the recital in Arurexure 83 is that the defendant bank is holding the title deeds as a security to the loan advanced to the applicants. In view of the above, evasion of stamp duty alleged by the applicants is not sustainable.

¶90

A further contention raised by the applicants is that the security interest created over the secured asset has not been registered with the Central ILegistry and thus the defendant is not entitled to enforce its security interest over the schedule immovable property. But according to the defendant, the security interest created over the schedule immovable property by way of mortgage has already been registered with the Central Registry and thus the defendant is entitled to enforce the security interest over the same. Annexure 84 is a copy of the computer generated id based search report down loaded from the web site of the Central Registry, which shows that the security interest had been created on the schedule immovable property by way of mortgage on 09.04.2015 in favour of the defendant bank and that had been registered with the Central Registry on 23.04.2015. Therefore, such contention raised by the applicants is not sustainable.

¶91

The next limb of contention raised by the applicants was regarding the sale of the schedule immovable property. It is contended that no valuation of the property is taken before fixing the reserve price of the schedule immovable property, that the valuation done is not intimated to them and the reserve price was fixed not in consultation with them and no 30 days' notice has been served on them and that the same has not been affrxed. Per contra, it is submitted by the defendant that in furtherance to the of the possession notice, the reserve^price of the schedule immovable^property :::*..

¶92

sA74512022

¶93

¶94

wa's fixed at{1,17,65,000/- and apublic notice of sale dated 18.10.2022 has been issued fixing the date of opening the tenders on 10.11.2022 and the property was sold for {1,18,15,000/- and the purchaser rernitted the full amount of sale price and a sale certificate dated 11.01.2023 was issued.

¶95

If the borrower fails to discharge his liability in full within the period as specified in sub-section (2) of S.13 of the Act, the secured creditor is entitled to take recourse to one or more of the measures including sale of the secured asset as specified in sub-section (a) of S.13 of the Act to recover his secured debt. Once possession of the secured asset is taken, the authorised officer or the secured creditor has to follow the guidelines as prescribed under Rr.8 & 9 of the Rules in sale of immovable secured assets. The relevant provisions commence from sub-rule (5) of R.8 of the Rules. The relevant

¶96

provisions read as below:-

¶97

"(5) Before fficting sale of the immovable property referred to in sub-nrle (l) of rule 9, the authorised fficer shall obtain vqluation of the property from an approved t,ahrer and in consultation'tvilh the secured creditor, fix the reserve price of the property antl may sell the whole or any part of such immovable secured asset by any of thefollowing methods:-

¶98

(a) by obtaining quotations from the persons dealing with similar securetl assets or otherwise interested in buying the such^qssels; or

¶99

(b) by inviting tenders from the public;

¶100

, @^{by holding publicauction including through e-auctiort ruode;or}

¶101

(d) by private treaty:

¶102

PROVIDED that in case of sale of immovable property in the State o/'Jammu and Kashntir, the provisions of Jammu and Kashmir Transfer of Property Act, 1977 shall appllt lo lhe^person who acquires such property in the State.

¶103

(6) The authorised fficer shall serve to the borrov,er a notice of thirty days for sale of the immovable secured assets, under sub-rule^(5):

¶104

PROVIDED that if the sale of such secured asset is being fficted by either inviting tenders from^{the public or by holdingpublicauction,the securedcreditorsshallcausea publicnoticein theform} given in Appendix IY-A to be published in two leading newspapers including one in vernacular language having wide circulation in the locality.

¶105

(7) Every notice of sale shall be ffixed on the conspicuous parl of the imntovable property and the authorised officer shall upload the detailed terms and conditions of^{the sale, on the web-siteof the} secured creditor, which shall include-

¶106

(a) the description of the immovable property to be sold, including the details of the encumbrances known to the secured creditor;

¶107

(b) the secured debtfor recovery ofwhich the property is to be sold;

¶108

¶109

¶110

(d) time and place of public auction or the time after which sale by any other mode shall be completed;

¶111

¶112

sA745t2022

¶113

(e) deposit of earnest money as mqy be slipulated by lhe secured creditor;

¶114

purchaser to know , A^{any other terms and} the nature andvalue^conditions, ofthe property.^{which the authorised ofiicerconsidersit necessory} for^a

¶115

(8) Sale by any method other than public auction or public tender, shall be on such terms as moy be settled between lhe secured creditor and the proposed purchaser in writing.

¶116

Time of sale, issue of sale certificate and delivery of possession, etc.

¶117

(1) No sale of immovable property under these rules, infirst instance shall take place before the expiry of thirty daysfrom the date onwhich the public notice of sole is published in newspapers as referred to in the proviso to sub-rule⁽⁶⁾ or rule 8 or notice of sale has been served to the borrower:

¶118

PROVIDED FURTHER that if sale of immovable property by any one of the methods specified by sub-rule (5) of rule 8 fails and sale is required to be conductecl again, the authorised officer shall serve, affrx and publish notice of sale of not less thanfifteen days to lhe borroter, Jbr any subsequent sale.

¶119

(2) The sale shall be confirmed in favour of the purchaser who has offered the highest sale price in his bid or tender or quotation or offer to the authorised oficer^qnd shall be subject to confirmation by the secured creditor:

¶120

PROVIDED that no sale under this rule shall be confirmed, dthe amount offered by sale price is less than the reserve price, specified under sub-rule⁽⁵⁾ of rule 8;

¶121

' PROVIDED F{JRTHER that if the authorised officer /ails to obtain a price higher than the reserve price, he may, with the consenl of the borrower and the secured creditor elfecl the sale at such price.

¶122

(3) On every sale of immovable property, the purchaser shall imntediately, i.e on the same day or not later than nexl working day, as the case may be, pay a deposit of tu,enty-five per cenl of the amount of the sale price, which is inclusive of earnest money deposited, if any, to the^quthorised officer conducting the sale and in default of such deposit, the property shall be sold again.

¶123

(4) The balance amount of purchase price payable shall be paid $' the purchaser to the authorised oficer on or before thefifteenth day of confirmalion of sale of the inntovuble property or such extended period as may be agreed upon in writing between the purchaser ond lhc secured creditor, in any case nol exceeding three ntonths.

¶124

(5) In default of payment within the period mentioned in sub-rule (1), the deposit shall be forfeited^{to the secured creditorand the property shall be resold and thedefaulting purchasershall} forfeit all claims to the property or to any part of the sumfor which it ntoy be subsecluenlly sold.

¶125

(6) On confirmation of sale by the secured creditor and d the terms of payment have been complied with, the authorised officer exercising the power o/ sale shall issue a certificate of sale of the immovable property infavour of the purchaser in lheform given in Appendix V to these rules.

¶126

' (7) Where the immovable property sold is subject to any encumbrances, the authorised officer mqy, f he thinl<s fit, allow the purchaser to deposit with him the money required to discharge the encumbronces and any interest due thereon together with such additional anrounl that ntoy be sfficient to meet the contingencies orfurther cost, expenses and interest as may be determined by him:

¶127

PROVIDED that if after meeting the cost of removing encumbrances and contingencies there is any surplus available out of the money deposited by the purchaser such surpltrs shall be paid to lhe purchaser within fifteen days from the date o finalisation of the sale.

¶128

(8) On such deposit of money for discharge of the encumbrances, the ailhorised officer shall issue or cause the purchaser to issue notices to the person intereslecl in or entitled tc.t the money deposited with him and take steps to make the poyment accordingly.

¶129

(9) The authorised ofiicer shall deliver the property to the purchaser Jree /iom encumbrances known to the secured creditor on deposit of money as specified in sub-rule⁽⁷⁾ above.

¶130

(10) The certificate of sale issued under sub-rttle (6) shall speciJically menlir,tn that whether the purchaser has purchased the immovable secured asset free /ron^qny encumbrances known to the secured creditor or not.^"

¶131

Annexure 816 is a copy of the sale notice dated 18.102022 issued by the defendant authorised officer of the defendant bank bringing the schedule immovable

sA745t2022

property for sale on 10.11.2022 against a reserve price of {1,17,65,000/- for recovery of debt due from the applicants and in respect of the loans availed by them. However, the applicants have contended that no proper valuation of the secured asset had been done and the valuation done was not intimated to them and that the reserve^price was fixed not in consultation with them. It is also their contention that the reserve^price is too low compared to the market value. It can only be presumed that the defendant had obtained a valuation of the schedule immovable property from an approved valuer and in consultation with the secured creditor only had fixed the reserve price of the same. It may be noted that the provisions of the Act and the Rules made thereunder do not call for intimation of reserve price fixed by the authorised officer of the secured creditor to the borrowers by a separate notice other than the sale notice. The borrowers need not be heard also in fixing the reserve price. There is no requirement of the creditor to consider the alternative valuation fumished by the borrowers also. It rnay pertinent to be mentioned here that a property may not fetch a value equivalent to the market value in a forced sale in operation of law. Annexure B22 shows that there was only one bidder for the property. There would have been a flurry of probable purchasers had the reserve price been too low. It further shows that the property had been sold for a sum of {1,18,15,000/ Therefore, the valuation adopted seems to be^just and reasonable in the above facts and circumstances of the case. The applicants could have brought a^{probable purchaser.} So, the contention to the contra raised by the applicants is not sustainable. A mere irregularity in valuation and the fixing of reserve price alone is not sufficient to set aside a sale held in operation of law unless and until there is material irregularity in conducting the sale. The provisions under the Act and the Rules made thereunder do not provide for the grant of any opportunity to the borrower of being heard before the valuation is made and the reserve price is fixed by the authorised officer. The borrower is entitled to a 30 days sale under sub-rule (6) of R.8 of the Rules. There is also no requirement for the secured :::ce

sA745t2022

creditor or its authorised officer to consider any alternative valuation filed at the instance of the borrower. Therefore, the contention to that extent raised by the applicants is not sustainable.

¶142

Annexure B17 is a photocopy of the postal receipts for having sent Annexure B16 notice to the applicants by registered post on 19.10.2022. Annexures B18 and Bl9 photocopies of retumed postal envelopes show that such notices sent to the applicants were returned un-served with the postal endorsement 'insufficient address'. Annexure B20 is aphotocopy of the extract of publication of Annexure Bl6 sale notice in Kannada in Kannada Prabha daily dated 22.10.2022. Annexure ,A3^(Annexure 821) is a photocopy of the extract of publication of Annexure Bl6 sale notice in English in the New Indian Express daily dated 22.10.2022. It is specifically contended by the applicants that Annexure 816 sale notice was not affixed at the conspicuous^place of the^property. Despite such contention, the defendant has not produced any proof for the same.

¶143

¶144

It is nobody's case that the sale held on 10.11.2022 was a subsequent sale on failure of the sale scheduled for the first instance for^want of bidders.^{The defendant} has no case that Annexure B16 sale notice dated 18.10.2022 was issued for sale of the schedule immovable property as the^previous attempts were^failed for^want of bidders. No previous sale notices in respect of the schedule immovable^{propertyhavebeen} prdduced by either side before this Tribunal. Inthe above facts and circumstances of the case and on the evidences adduced by either side it^is evident^{that the sale of the schedule} immovable property scheduled to be held on^10.1 1.2022 by^virtue of^{Annexure B16 sale} notice dated 18.10.22 was forthe first instance. It^{is specifically statedin Annexure B16} sale notice dated 18.102022 that this notice^{shall also serve as notice under sub-rule (6)} of R.8 and sub-rule⁽¹⁾ of R.9 of the Rules^{to the borrowers and the guarantors.Without} any knowhow to such Rules, it is stated^{thereafter in the said salenotice thatthe sale} be held on 10.11.2022, i.e on the^23'd day of^{the sale notice, whichmeansthat} :::,0

Ai\

sA745t2022

irrespective of the date of delivery of Annexures 816 sale notice dated 18.10.2022 by way of service, affixture and publication, there was no gap of thirty days as mandated in sub-rule (6) of R.8 of the Rules was given under the sale notice itself.

¶149

, 29. It is specifically contended by the applicants in grounds (12) and (13) that the sale notice had not been served upon them with a gap of thirty days to the sale. Undisputedly, the sale was taken place on 10.11.2022 for the first instance. Conspicuously, no word about this has been narrated by the defendant in his statement of objection. No whisper as against the contention of non-service of thirty days of sale notice. The defendant has no case that a clear 30 days sale notice had been served, affixed and published. R.9 of the Rules deals with time of sale, issue of sale certificate and delivery of possession etc, which reads as under:-

¶150

' "9. Time of sale, issue of sale certificate and delivery of possession, etc.

¶151

(l) No sale of immovable property under these rules, infirst inslance shall take place before the expiry of thirty days from the date on which the public notice of sale is published in newspapers as referred to in the proviso to sub-rule⁽⁶⁾ or rule 8 or notice ofsale has been served to the borrotver:

¶152

PROVIDED FURTHER that if sale of immovable property by an.y one of the methods specified by sub-rule⁽⁵⁾ of rule I fails and sale is^recluired to^be conducted again,^{the authorisedofJicer} shqll serve, ffix and^publish notice of sale of nol less than fi/ieen days^{to lhe borro'vver,} for any subsequent sale. "

¶153

As per sub-rule (l) of R.9 of the Rules, no sale of immovable property in

¶154

the first instance shall take place before the expiry of thirty days from the date on^whicha public notice of sale is published in newspapers or notice of sale has been served to the borrower. In the instant case, the^public notice of sale was^published in^{newspapers as} referred to in the proviso to sub-rule⁽⁶⁾ of R.8 of the Rules on22.10.2022.Therefore,^the sale took place on 10.1L2022 is well beyond and^{far fromthe Rules prescribed. Sub-rule} (6) of R.8 of the Rules prescribes a clear thirty days of notice to the borrower for sale of the immovable^property, and it reads thus:-

¶155

"(6) The authorised officer shall serve to the borrotver a notice of thirq, days for sale of the immovable secured assets, under wb-rule^(5)"

sA745t2022

The word 'shall' used in sub-rule (6) of R.8 of the Rules makes it imperative that for any sale for the first instance, the authorised officer has to deliver the sale notice to the borrower with a gap of thirty days to the sale, the deficiency of which will render the service null and void in the eye of law. The defendant has no case that the applicants have waived any of such delivery. In such a situation, the authorised officer was bound to obey the Rule in stricto sensu. If the Rule prescribes a particular method of delivery in respect of the sale notice, the authorised officer has to do the same in that way only and in no other way as deemed fit to him. The Hon'ble Madras High Court in Shanmuqanathan v Indian Overseos Bank freported in 20]7 (3\ KLT SN l2 (C.No.15\ Madl has held that when the statute mandates that a particular thing shall be done in a particular manner, it shall be done only in that manner.

¶160

The Hon'ble High Court of Kerala in Mac Charles^(lndia) Limited v State o-f Kerala [reported in 202 ] 6.\ KLT 658J has held that where a statute^prescribes a thing to be done in a particular manner, it has to be done in that mamer only, and it reads thus:-

¶161

"lt is settled law that, where^q statute prescribes a thing lo be done in a particular manner, it has to be done in thqt manner and in no other mqnner. Other melhods of^performqnce are^necessarily forbidden.^"

¶162

A conjoint reading of sub-rule (6) of R.8 and sub-rule⁽¹⁾ of R.9 of the Rules makes it ample clear that no sale of the immovable^property in^{the first instance} shall take^place before the expiry of thirty days^from the^{date on which the noticeof sale} has been served to the borower and^published in^{the newspapers.In the instant case,} irrespective of the date of delivery, the notice of sale is dated^{18.10.2022 andthe sale} took place on 10.1 1.2022 without^giving a^gap of thirty^days.

¶163

The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Mathew^{Varghese v AmrithaKumari} treported in^{2014 (2) KLT 61 (SCt : (2014t 5 SCC 610J has held thatthe use of the} expression 'or' in R.9(l) should be^{read as 'and' as that alone would be in consonance} with S.13(8) of the Act, and it reads thus:-

¶164

sA74512022

¶165

¶166

"The requirement under rule 8(6) and Rule 9(l) contentplqtes a clear 30 duy.s individual notice to the borrower and also a public notice by way of publication in the newspalters. ln other v.,ords, while the publication in newspaper should provide for 30 days clear notice, since Rule 9(l) olso stqtes thot such notice of sale is to be in accordance with proviso to sub-rule (6) of Rule 8, 30 days clear notice to the borrower should also be ensured as stipulated under ntle 8(6) a.s well. Therefore, the use of the expression 'or'in Rule 9(l) should be read as 'and'as thal alone would be in consonctnce with Section l3(8) of the SARFAESI Act."

¶167

The Hon'ble Allahabad High Court in Dqtanath Ponde.v v. State of U.P and Ors [reported in 2008 (]t Bank CLR 758 (All\has held that period of thirty days has to be given under the notice contemplated by sub-rule (6) of R.8 of the lLules r/w S.l3(4) of the Act, that sale held within such period of thirty days is illegal and hence liable to be quashed, that sale deed executed pursuant to such sale is invalid and that the purchaser is entitled to get back the purchase price paid and other expenses incurred. The Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in Mono.i D Kapasi & Anr v. Union of India & Ors [reported in III (2005) BC 592^(DBU has held that the requirements under sub-rule (6) of R.8 and subrule (1) of R.9 of the Rules are mandatory and hence they have to be complied with by secured creditor.

¶168

The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Matheyy Varghese v Amritha Kumari freporred in 2014⁽²⁾ KLT 61^(SCt :⁽²⁰¹⁴⁾ 5 SCC 610J has held that unless and until a clear 30 days' notice is given to the borrower, no sale transfbr can be resorted to by a secured creditor, and it reads thus:-

¶169

"Once the sale does not take place pursuant lo a notice issued under rules 8 and 9, read along wilh S. I^j(8) for which the entire blame cannot be thrown on the borrower, it is imperative that for effecting the sale, the procedure prescribed above will hqve lo befolloted afresh, as lhe notice isstted earlier would lapse. ln thal respect, the only other provision to be noled is sub-rule (8) of R.8 as per which sale by any method other than public auction or public tender can be on such terms as may be settled between the parties inwriting. Asfar as sub-rule (8) is concerned, the parties referred to can only relote to the secured creditor and the borrower. It is, therefore, imperative that for the sale to be fficted under S. I 3(8), the procedure prescribed under R.8 read ulong with 9(l hqs to be necessarily followed.^"

¶170

¶171

37 . In view of the above decisions cited, it is clear that no sale of immovable property in the first instance shall take place before the expiry of thirty days from the date on which the public notice of sale is published in the newspapers as referred to in the proviso to sub-rule (6) of R.8 and notice of sale has been served to the borrower as referred to in sub-rule (6) of R.8 of the Rules. In the case on hand, the defendant bank

¶172

sA74s/2022

¶173

¶174

published Annexure 816 sale notice dated 18.10.22 in newspapers as referred to in the proviso to sub-rule (6) of R.8 of the Rules on 22.10.2022 and the sale took place on 10.11.2022 before the expiry of thirty days from 22.10.2022 and even frorn 18.10.2022. In the above circumstances, the sale held on 10.11.2022 is null and void. This Tribunal has no hesitation in holding that a clear thirty days of notice to the borrower regarding sale is a pre-requisite for sale. Sub-rule (1) of R.9 of the Rules is couched in a negative language, which only indicates that no sale of the immovable property shall take place before the expiry of thirty days from the date of publication and from the date of delivery to the borrower, which is mandatory. The computation of thirty days has to be calculated from both. A conjoint reading of sub-rules (6) of R.8 and sub-rule (1) of R.9 of the Rules, would make it ample clear that if sale of immovable property by any one of the methods specified by sub-rule (5) of R.8 of the Rules is to be taken place for the first instance, the authorised officer shall serve the notice of sale to tlie borrower and publish the same for public with a clear gap of thirty days.

¶175

For one more reason also, this Tribunal finds that the sale held on 10.11.2022 is null and void. It is specifically contended by the applicants in the fourteenth ground that the sale notice had not been affixed on a conspicuous part of the property. Though the defendant claimed in the statement of objection that a copy of the sale notice was affixed on a conspicuous^part of the mortgaged^property no^amount of evidence to substantiate the claim was produced befbre this Tribunal. No^proof regarding affixture of Annexure 816 sale notice dated 18.10.22 such as^photograph, report of affixture etc has been produced before this Tribunal by^{the defendant.Thus, thereis a} clear violation of sub-rule⁽⁷⁾ of R.8 of the Rules. Except^{defending thatAnnexure 816} sale notice dated 18.10.22 was sent to the applicants^{by registered postand the same was} published in two newspapers dated 22.10.2022 the defendant has no case that Annexure

sA74512022

B16 sale notice dated 18.10.2022 was affixed in terms of sub-rule (7) of R.8 of the Rules.

¶180

Sub-rule (7) of R.8 of the Rules reads as under:-

¶181

(7) Every notice of sale shqll be affaed on the conspicuous part oJ'the imntovable property and the authorised fficer shall upload the detailed terms^qnd conditions of the sale, on the web-site of the secured creditor, which shall include-

¶182

(a) the description of the immovqble property to be sold, inclnding the details of the encumbrances known to the secured creditor;

¶183

(b) the secured debtfor recovery ofwhich the property is to be sold;

¶184

¶185

(d) time and place of pubtic auction or the time ctfrer which sale by any other mode shall be completed;

¶186

¶187

(e) deposit of earnest money as may be stipulated by lhe secured creditor,'

¶188

(/) any other terms and conditions, which the authorised officer considers it necessary for a purchaser to know the nature^qndvalue ofthe property.

¶189

The words 'every notice of sale shall be affixed' mandate the affixture of sale notice for the first instance as well as on every subsequent sale. Sub-rule (7) as in the present form was substituted vide GSR 1040(E) dated 17.10.2018 made effective with effect from 18.10.2018. Prior to substitution, sub-rule (7) read as under:_

¶190

"(7) Every notice of sale shall be affaed on a conspicuous pqrt of the intmovable property and may, if the authorised officer deeds it fi|, put on the we-site of the secured creditor on the Internet.^"

¶191

The fact that the Rule makers in their wisdom has made it mandatory for , the authorised officer to put the notice of sale on the web-site of the secured creditor by way of such amendment by substituting the word 'may' with 'shall' only means that the law makers consciously made sub-rule⁽⁷⁾ mandatory and compulsory as a^premeasure for the authorised officer to effect the sale.

¶192

¶193

In the above facts and circumstances of the case and in view of the discussion as above, after examining the facts and circumstances of the case and the evidences produced by both sides, this Tribunal came to the conclusion that the measures tuk., by the defendant under sub-section^(a) of S.l3 of the Act are not in accordance with the provisions under the Act and the Rules made thereunder.^However,the defendant is entitled to commence the^proceedings to enforce its security^interest over the schedule immovable^property after duly issuing the sale^{notice under sub-rules(6) and}

¶194

sA745/2022

¶195

¶196

(7) of R.8 and sub-rule (l) of R.9 of the Rules afresh in accordance with law. Thus, the sale conducted on 10.1I .2022 in respect of the schedule immovable property is set aside. 42. In the result, IA Nos.301212022, 301312022, 313512022, 313612022, 335312022 and 38312023 are closed and SA 74512022 is allowed with the following declarations/directions : -

¶197

(i) this Tribunal declares that the recourses and measures taken by the defendant under 5.13(4) of the Act by virtue of Annexure 816 sale notice dated 18.10.2022 is invalid and thus set aside;

¶198

(iD the defendant bank shall reverse all costs, charges and expenses incurred by it or any expenses incidental thereto in connection with the impugned action taken by virtue of Annexure 816 sale notice dated 18.10.2022 against the borrowers under the provisions of S.l3(a) of the Act and shall not claim them as legally recoverable debt by operation of law;

¶199

(iii) The sale held on 10.11,.2022 in respect of the schedule immovable property is declared as null and void and thus set aside;

¶200

(iv) the defendant is granted liberty to invoke the provisions under the Act for , enforcement of security interest over the schedule immovable property afresh in accordance with the provisions of the Act and the Rules made thereunder n'reticulously;

¶201

(v) the parties shall suffer their respective costs.

¶202

Communicate copy of this final order to both parties as provided in subsection (7) of S.l7 of the Act r/w R.l6 of the Debs Recovery Tribunal (Procedure) Rules,

¶203

1993 (as amended from time to time).

¶204

fDictated^{to my PA directlyon the computer, correctedandpronormccd by nte in the openTribLtnctlonthis the 22'd} day ofNovember,20231

¶205

IAZ ALI) PRESIDING OFFICER

¶206

Appendix to 5A745/2022

APPENDIX

Applicant's Exhibits

Witnessforthe	applicant	Nil
Witnessfordef	endant	Nil
ExhibitNo.	D:rte	Particularsofdocurnents
Annexure-A	l16.11.2021	Photocopyofthe demandnoticeissuedunder S.13(2)ofthe Actby thedefendant againsttheapplicantscallingupon themtodischargethedebtoft78,83,213.14ason 15.11.2021withinsixtydaysfromthedateofreceiptofthe notice
Annexure-A	203.03.2022	Photocopyofthepossessionnoticeissuedbythedefendant under5.13(4)oftheActinrespectoftheschedule immovable property
AnnexureA3	22.10.2022	Photocopyoftheextractofpublicationofthesale notice dated19.10.2022inEnglishintheNewIndianExpress daily

¶211

Defendant's Exhibits

¶212

Annexure-B	l19.02.2015	Photocopyofthesanctionletterissuedbythedefendant banktotheapplicantsadvising thenisanctionoftermloan ashousing loanof{78.75lakhs undernon-prioritysector, whichwascountersignedbytheapplicantsintokenof havingacceptedthe termsandconditionstherein
Annexure-B	204.04.2015	Photocopyofthe termloanagreement executedbythe applicantsin favour ofthe defendant bank
Annexure-B	309.04.2015	Photocopyofthememorandumofdepositoftitledeeds executedby theI'tapplicantinfavourofthedefendant bankinrespectofthescheduleimmovableproperty
Annexure84	16.01.2023	Photocopyofthe computergeneratedidbased searchreport inrespectofthe scheduleimmovable properly downloaded fromthewebsiteofthe Central Registry
Annexure85	16.11.2021	Photocopyofthe demandnoticeissuedurnderS.l3(2)ofthe Actbythedefendant againsttheapplicantscallingupon themtodischargethedebtof<78,83,213.14ason 15.11.2021withinsixtydaysfromthedateofreceiptofthe notice
AnnexureB6	17.11.2021	Photocopyofthe postalreceiptslbrhavingsent Annexure 85by registered posttothe applicants
Annexure87		Photocopyofthepostalacknolvledgernentcardsignedby thel'tapplicantfbrhavingreceived Annexure85notice senttohimby registeled post
Annexure B8		Photocopyofthepostal acknowledgement cardsignedby the2"dapplicantlorhavingreceiveclAnnexure85notice senttoherby registered post

¶213

¶214

Appendix to 5A74512022

¶215

¶216

Annexure B9	03.03.2022	Photocopyofthepossessionnoticeissuedbythe defendant inrespectofthescheduleimmovable property
AnnexureBl0	0s.03.2022	Photocopyofthe postal receiptsforliavingsent Annexure 89notice by registered posttothe applicants
AnnexureBlI	08.03.2022	Photo-copyofthe postal acknowledgement card signed by theI'tapplicanttbrhavingreceived Annexure89notice senttohimby registered post
Annexure B12	08.03.2022	Photocopyofthepostalacknowledgernentcardsignedby the2"dapplicantforhavingreceive-dAnnexure89notice
		senttoherby registered post
AnnexureBl3	03.03.2022	Photocopyofthephotographshowingaffixtureof Annexure89
AnnexureB14	06.03.2022	PhotocopyofextractofpublicationofAnnexure89in EnglishintheNewsTraildaily
Annexure B15	06.03.2022	PhotocopyofextractofpublicationofAnnexure89in Kannadainthe KannadaPrabhadaily
Annexure816	18.10.2022	Photocopyofthesalenoticeinrespectoftheschedule immovable property
AnnexureB17	19.10.2022	Photocopyofthe postal receiptsforhavingsent Annexure Bl6notice by registered posttothe applicants
AnnexureBl8		Photocopyofthereturnedpostalenvelopeaddressedtothe l'tapplicantwiththepostalendorsement^.address insufficient'
AnnexureB19		Photocopyofthe returned postal envelopeaddressedtothe 2'oapplicantr.r,iththepostalendorsement^,address insufficient'
AnnexureB20	22.t0.2022	Photocopyoftheextractofthepublicationofthesale notice dated19.10.2022inKannaclainKannadaprabha daily
Annexure821	22.10.2022	Photocopyoftheextractofthepublicationofthesale notice dated19.10.2022inEnglishinthe NewIndian Expressdaily
AnnexureB22	10.11.2022	PhotocopyofE-auction reportofsale
AnnexureB23	14.t	.2022
AnnexureB24	11.0t.2023	Photocopyofsalecertificateissuedbythedefendantin respectoftheschedurleirnmovableproperty

¶217

\ .cLv y '^.\'

¶218

rRESrDrIS'or.r.r*

¶219

,^ Schedute to 5A745t2022

¶220

¶221

¶222

All that piece and parcel of the residential property bearing Municipal No.23 (old No.289), Property ID No.22-17-23, measuring 1000 sq.ft. with building constructed thereon, ( GF + FF + SF) situated at 52"d cross, 4th Block, Near Sri Rama Mandira, Rajajinagar, Bangalore, Belonging to Mr. Gajendra M.

¶223

Boundaries of property as per documents : 'East : Property No. 288 West : Property No. 290 North : ,Road

¶224

South : Property No. 244

¶225

.z l-_^. iu1t-^*'*1) \a9 \ d,-" PRESIDING OFFICER

¶226

¶227

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBTINAL. I, KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE

¶228

PRESENT: SRI IMTI AZ ALT PRESIDING OFFICER

¶229

Dated the22"d day of November,2023

¶230

SECURITISATION APPLICATION NO. 745 OF 2022

¶231

Between Gajendra M, S/o Muniswamy Muniraju, 520, 5th Cross, Mahalakshmi Layout, Raj aj inagar, Bangalore, Karnataka - 560010 and another. And

¶232

...Applicants

¶233

The authorised offlcer, Karnataka Bank Liniited, Asset Recovery Management Branch. l't Floor, FKCCI Building, Kempegowda Road, Bangalore, Karnataka - 560009.

¶234

Defendant

¶235

FINAL ORDEIT

¶236

\ $q? o:t,

Mr Gajendra M v. Karnataka Bank Limited

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mr Gajendra M v. Karnataka Bank Limited

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Bank of India versus Ranjan Jyoti Goswami

Uco Bank versus MD Abdul Razzak

Kusum Chandrakant Raut versus Icici Home Finance Company Ltd.

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited versus Om Transport

Idfc First Bank Limited versus Paras Poly N Print & Ors.

Canara Bank versus Anita Gupta and Ors.