Debts Recovery Tribunal set aside a challenge to an e-auction sale notice under the SARFAESI Act, ruling that the bank had duly followed statutory procedure for demand and possession notices. Since no auction occurred, the application to invalidate the notice was dismissed.
Application dismissed; interlocutory applications disposed of.
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 THIS THE 23RD DAY OF APRIL 2024
PRESENT: GUMMADI GOPICHAND, PRESIDING OFFICER sA.No.2 44/2022
M/s Shiva Sai Jayalakshmi Tyres Rep. by its Proprietor Sri Maddali Rama Rao, S/o SubbaRao, aged 42years Occ:business, R/o H.No. 10/50- 15, Raghavendra Nagar, Anj aneyaSwamy Temple, Satyanarayanapuram Edulapuram(Rural), Khammam-SO7163
..Applicant.
Versus
Punjab National Bank rep. by Authorized officer CIRCLE Office, Secunderabad Circle, 103, D.No .8-2-2481 A, Maharshi House, Road No.3, Banjara Hills, Hyderabad-soO 034.
..Respondent Bank.
Counsel for the Applicant : Sn D. Raghauulu Counselfor Respondent Bank : Sn N. Meher Prasad
-:ORDER:.
2
SA.No.244/22
dt.19.O8.2O22. But the Applicant has not received any demand notice, possession notice or sale notice and the said notices were neither affixed on the schedule property nor published in two leading newspapers. Hence, the SA.
The Applicant availed credit facilities from theRespondentBank andlater defaulted in makingpayments andthe loanaccount was classiliedas NPA as per the RBI guidelines on 10.05.2021. The Bank issuedDemand notice u/s 13(2) of the SARFAESI Act, 2OO2 dt.16.08.2021and the said noticewas received by the Applicant. But when theApplicant failed to comply with the said demand, possession notice u/s13(a) of the Act dt.08.O3.2O22was issued by the Bankbut the saidnotice was returnedas refused and the said notice was affixed on the schedulepropertyand also published in two leading newspapers viz., Businessstandard and Mana Telanganaand thereafter e Action sale Noticedt.19.08.2022 was issued by the Respondent Bank by frxingthe date of auction of the scheduleproperty on 27.Og.2O22. Challengingthe saidsale notice,the Applicantfiled the present SA and obtained interimorders however, failedto comply with the said conditional orderspassed by this Hon'bleTribunal. So, the RespondentBank was constrained to issueanother E AuctionSale Notice dt.12.05 .2023fixing the date of auctionon 19.06.2023but the said auction was not materialized for want of bidders.The Applicant filed the SA only to hurdle the proceedings initiated by the RespondentBank for recoveryof their outstandingdues. Accordingly, Ld.Counsel prayedto dismiss the SA'
SA.No.244/22
Polnt No.(i):-
SA.No.244/22
Point No.(iil)r
(Dictated to the P.4., transcribedbg her, corrected, signed and" pronounced bg me in the open court on thisttrc 23'd dag of APril,2024).
sd/(G. GOPICHAND) PRESIDINGOFFICER
TFTUE Co
O s-8,
Assf. Recl #PY<br>DflT,l, HY$EltriE/4D
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the applicant established any ground for setting aside the Sale Notice dated 19.08.2022 issued by the bank?
What relief is applicable in light of the procedural compliance by the bank?
3 provisions across 1 enactments
M/s Shiva Sai Jayalakshmi Tyres
Punjab National Bank
GUMMADI GOPICHAND
As recorded by the court registry
2 orders share this CNR
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
