Allowed

Dr Arifa Banu v. Bank of Baroda

DRT23 Apr 2024SA/129/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debt Recovery Tribunal allowed the SARFAESI application filed by an applicant against a bank. The court held that the bank failed to establish service of mandatory Demand and Possession notices, leading to the set aside of the auction notice.

What did the court decide?

Sale Notice dated 07.02.2023 set aside; Respondent bank directed not to debit auction expenses to borrower’s loan account; Liberty granted to proceed further if default continues.

Dr Arifa Banu versus Bank of Baroda — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2024)

SA No.129 of 2023

23.04.2024

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHENNAI

¶5

Dated this the 23^rd day of April, 2024

¶6

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

¶7

SARFAESI APPLICATION No.129 of 2023

¶8

Dr . Arifa Banu, D/o. Mr. Riyaz Basha Residing at: No.58, Panchayat Office Street Pennagaram Post and Taluk Dharmapuri, District-636 810 ….Applicant

¶9

-Vs-

¶10

Bank of Baroda, Rep by its Authorized Officer Branch Office at: Santhosh Complex 61 G, Pennagaram Main Road, Dharmapuri, District-636 810 . ….R espondent

¶11

C ounsels on record / appeared:

¶12

Counsel for Applicant : M/s. A.M. Kamalanath Counsel for Respondent : M/s. S. Pandurangan

¶13

ORDER

¶14

This SA is filed challenging the Sale cum Auction notice dated 07.02.2023 issued

¶15

by respondent bank scheduling the sale to 10.03.2023 (published in Dinamani Tamil daily dated 09.02.2023) for recovery of a sum of Rs.27,35,984.13p.

¶16

It is the case of applicant that she availed educational loan to the tune of Rs.16,12,000/- from erstwhile Vijaya bank in the month of December, 2015, for pursuing her medical studies, by mortgaging the schedule mentioned property. It is submitted that due to the outbreak of Covid-19, applicant could start her Doctor profession in

SA No.129 of 2023

23.04.2024

Pennagaram area as a Junior Duty Doctor from the month of February 2022, after complying with all formalities. It is the case of applicant that to the shock and surprise of applicant, during the month of February 2023, applicant was informed by her relatives about the affixture of the Public Auction Notice dated 07.02.2023 on the schedule mentioned property and the publication of the same in Tamil daily, Dinamani, dated 09.02.2023. It is contended that respondent bank failed to serve mandatory Demand Notice and Possession notice to applicant before bringing the property to sale.

¶21

Whereas respondent bank, who was on caveat, had filed counter and typed set of documents evidencing the action taken by them under the Act. Ld. Counsel for respondent bank submitted that despite their best efforts respondent bank could not furnish acknowledgment cards evidencing service of Possession Notice to applicant and prayed for passing necessary orders.

¶22

In the circumstances, as respondent bank failed to establish the measures as contemplated under the Act, this SA is liable to be allowed.

¶23

In the result, this SA is allowed, however without costs. Sale Notice dated 07.02.2023 is hereby set aside. Respondent bank is directed not to debit subject impugned Sale Notice expenses to the borrower’s loan account.

¶24

Interim order, if any granted and subsisting till this day stands vacated and all other IAs, if any pending stand closed. Liberty be with respondent to proceed further in accordance to law, if the default of the borrower continues.

SA No.129 of 2023

23.04.2024

With the above observations, this SA stands disposed.

¶29

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

¶30

guidelines.

¶31

(Dictated to PS, transcribed by her, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in Open Court, on this the

¶32

23^rd day of April, 2024)

¶33

Sd/-

¶34

(GANAPATHI K.R.K) PRESIDING OFFICER

Dr Arifa Banu v. Bank of Baroda

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dr Arifa Banu v. Bank of Baroda

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

Prakash Patel versus Repco Home Finance Limited

Mr D Mahendran versus State Bank of India

M s a S Juice And Maligai Store versus City Union Bank Limited

Bank of Baroda versus M s Green Leaf

K Shanmugam versus State Bank of India

Jammu and Kashmir Bank Limited versus Shibu