Appellant challenged bank's possession and sale notices under Section 17 SARFAESI Act. Tribunal held bank served notices correctly via post, WhatsApp, and newspapers, and affirmed notices were valid, dismissing the application.
The Securitization Application was dismissed; no order as to costs.
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 DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL - I AT HYDERABAD
DATED-I I-IIS I I][ 29III DAY OF MAY. 2024
PRESENT: GUMMADI GOPICHAND, PRESIDING oFFICER
sA.No. 124/2C23
Mrs. Sunitha Burugu, W/o Tulasi Das [3nrugu, Aged about 54 years, Occ:house wife, H.No.9-3/ 5, Road No.8D, Dwarakapuram colony, Dilsukhnagar, Hyderabad-sOO 060.
Versus The IDBI Bank, Kachiguda branch, Hyderabad Rep. by its Authorized Officer, D.No.3-3 -541 A, Kachiguda Station Road, Beside Nagina Bakcry, Hyderabad.
..Applicant
..Respondent.
Counsel for the Applicant Sri Sriniuas Akkapaka.
Counsel for the Respondent Bank Sri Triuikram Chitturu
-: oRD'EB:_
- This application is filed by the Applicant u/s.17 of the SARFAESI Act, 2OO2, challenging the Possession Notice dt.17.06.2022 and also Sale Notice dt. I 5.03.2o2i\ publishccl on ot .o4.2023 issued by rhe Respondent Bank in respect of the schedule property and to declare the same as null and void.
sA1,2412023
from the Respondent Bank and the Applicant stood as guarantor and created mortgage in respect of the schedule property. The Applicant could not pay some instalments due to covid pandemic and the Respondent Bank agreed for One Time Settlement of the loan amount and during the ors, the Applicant paid Rs.2,go,0ool- to the Respondent Bank on 31.os.2o22. without waiting for the further period for payment of the balance ors amount, the Respondent bank initiated procccdings bclorc thc cMM, Malkajgiri for taking physical possession of thc schcdulc propcrty and latcr the Respondent also issued Sale Notice dt.1s.03.2023. No demand notice was issued by the Respondent Bank and the Bank failed to affix the possession notice on the schedule property and also not published the same in daily newspapers. Hence, the SA.
sAt24l2023
and also published in two daily newspapers on Ol.O4.2O23.Accordingly, the Respondent Bank prayed to dismiss the SA.
Point No.(i) :-
Ld. Counsel for the Respondent Bank reiterated their respective
versions as stated supra.
Respondent Bank offt but the Applicant failed
to comply with the she :, . mil e only part payment of Rs.2.8O lakhs. Q ,r .i.tl 1 :t '!
demand notice and 4 1'"' possesslon ntitrcb".a?4 the possession notice was
sA1.2412023
not affixed on the schedule property and so the impugned demand notice, possession notice and sale notice issued by the Respondent Bank are liable to set aside.
sAt2412023
and the Applicant. has lailcd to establish any infirmities in issuing the said notices by the Bank. So, I see no ground warranting interference of this Tribunal with the steps initiated by the Respondent Bank in taking possession of the schedule property and also in issuing sale noticc in rcspcct of the schedule property.
Point No.(ii):-
t2. communicate a copy of this ordcr to thc parties concerned.
(Dctated to the P'A, transcibed bg her, corrected, signed" and pronounced bg me in the open court on this the 2gh dag of Mag, 2024).
sd/(c. coPrcHANDl PRESIDING OFFICER
TRUE COPY
0.p.'f^</Y
ffir""
DR[.I, HyDE.ell,3,.le
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the applicant has established any valid ground for setting aside the Possession Notice dated 17.06.2022 and Sale Notice dated 15.03.2023 issued by the respondent bank?
Whether the respondent bank duly followed the procedure laid down under the SARFAESI Act and Rules, 2002 in issuing possession and sale notices?
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Mrs. Sunitha Burugu
The IDBI Bank
Gummadi Gopichand
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
Gummadi Gopichand
