Allowed

Venkatesan Gangadharan v. Union Bank of India

DRT3 Jan 2024SA/169/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Applicant challenged an auction sale notice issued by Union Bank of India. The Tribunal allowed the application, set aside the notice, and directed the bank not to debit sale expenses, finding the bank failed to prove affixation of the notice on the asset and no sale occurred.

What did the court decide?

Sale notice dated 08.02.2023 set aside respondent bank directed not to debit sale expenses interim orders vacated IA pending closed liberty retained to initiate action afresh.

Venkatesan Gangadharan versus Union Bank of India — Execution and Attachment | DRT (2024)

¶1

¶2

S.A.No.169 of 2023 03.01.2024

¶3

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHENNAI

¶4

Dated this the 03^rd day of January, 2024

¶5

Present: Shri Ganapathi K.R.K.

¶6

Presiding Officer

¶7

SARFAESI APPLICATION No. 169 of 2023

¶8

Venkatesan Gangadharan S/o Gangadharan No.50/77, Gokulam Illam Bajanai Koil Street Padi – 600 050

¶9

…. Applicant

¶10

¶11

The Authorized Officer Union Bank of India Anna Salai Branch 153, LIC Building, Ground Floor Anna salai Chennai – 600 002 …. Respondent

¶12

Counsels on record / appeared:

¶13

Counsel for Applicant : M/s Antony Selvam Counsel for Respondent : M/s Dr.S.R.Sundaram

¶14

ORDER

¶15

This SA is filed challenging the E-Auction Sale Notice dated 08.02.2023 issued

¶16

by respondent bank scheduling sale to 28.03.2023 for recovery of a sum of Rs.53,06,522.22p.

¶17

Heard Ld.counsels appearing for both the parties.

¶18

Ld.counsel for applicant submits that applicant could not make out any tenable

¶19

infirmities in the procedure adopted by the respondent bank, while issuing the impugned

¶20

sale notice and further that no sale has taken place on the scheduled date.

¶21

¶22

S.A.No.169 of 2023 03.01.2024

¶23

Ld. counsel for respondent bank submitted that respondent had followed the procedures as contemplated under the Act which is evidenced through the typed set of documents filed along with counter. Ld.counsel also submitted that no sale had taken place on the scheduled date and prayed for passing necessary orders.

¶24

However on perusal of records, it is found that respondent bank has neither averred in their counter nor furnished any documents, relating to affixture of the impugned sale notice on the conspicuous place of the secured asset.

¶25

In the result, as respondent bank could not establish its vires as warranted under law and since it is also submitted that no sale had taken place on the scheduled date, even on that count, the impugned sale notice has become infructuous, this SA is liable to be allowed.

¶26

Accordingly, this SA stands allowed, however without costs. Sale notice dated 08.02.2023 scheduling sale to 28.03.2023 is hereby set aside. Respondent bank is directed not to debit the sale notice expenses to the borrowers loan account. Interim order, if any granted and subsisting till this day stands vacated and all other IAs, if any pending stand closed.

¶27

Liberty be with respondent bank to initiate action afresh, if the default of the borrowers continues.

¶28

With the above directions, this SA stands disposed.

¶29

¶30

S.A.No.169 of 2023 03.01.2024

¶31

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

¶32

guidelines.

¶33

(Dictated to Steno (DD), transcribed by her, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in Open Court, on this the 03^rd day of January, 2024)

¶34

Sd/-

¶35

(GANAPATHI K.R.K) PRESIDING OFFICER

Venkatesan Gangadharan v. Union Bank of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Venkatesan Gangadharan v. Union Bank of India

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

G Sudhakaran versus Iifl Home Finance Ltd.

Wayne Burt Petrochemicals Pvt. Ltd. versus LIC Housing Finance Limited

S K Jeevanantham versus Indian Bank

Anitha Venkatesan versus Union Bank of India

L Karthikeyan versus Idbi Bank

City Union Bank Limited versus M/S Janata Timber and Saw Mill