This Tribunal dismissed an application seeking to set aside a possession notice and physical possession measures taken by a secured creditor under the SARFAESI Act. The court held there was no violation of statutory provisions.
Securitization Application dismissed; noted interlocutory applications closed; 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_ II AT HYDERABAD
DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025
PRESENT: SH. RAN4ESHWAR KOTHE, B.Com, L.LB.(Hons.), N4.A. PRESIDING OFFICER
Securitization Application No.178 OF 2023
Rep by its Prop. B. Vinod Kumar S/o Late B. Sharanappa, Aged about 33years Occ:Business, R/o H. No.12- 11-973/1 Boudha Nagar, Warasiguda, Secu nderabad Hydera bad-500061
S/o Late B. Sharanappa, Aged about 33years Occ:Business, R/o H. No.12- 11-973/1 Boudha Nagar, Warasiguda, Secu nderabad Hydera bad- 500061
... ....Applicants.
Versus
Edelweiss Asset Reconstruction Company Limited O/o Edelweiss House, Off CST Road Kalina, lvlumbai-400098 Rep by its Authorized Officer
....Respondent.
Counsel for the Applicants : Mr. K. Buchi Babu Counsel for Respondent : Mr. G. Prabhakar Sarma
-:9_B_8.E8:-
The Applicant filed the present Securitisation Application u/s 17 of the Securitization and Reconstructlon of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002(hereinafter referred to as [m'1 '^ 't<; - \'r
Page 2 of 5
SA No.17812023
"the Act") to set aside the possession notice dated 72.O7.2022 anda1l measures including takingphysical possession ofthe application schedule propertypursuant to advocate commlssionerdated 29.03.2023 in Crl.MP No.508/2023 on the file ofx Addl. MM Court, Secunderabad, Hyderabad.
Page 3 of 5
sA No.17812023
served. Demand notice was published in 'Business Standard, and 'Nava Telangana' on t3.10.2022. The applicants did not allow to paste the notice at the premises. As no payment was made, possession notice dated 20.72.2022 was issued,3.d applicant received the same for himself and applicants 1 and 2. The possession notice was published in 'Business Standard. and,Nava Telangana, on 23.72.2022. As the applicants did not allow to paste the possession notice on secured asset, a photograph was taken at the time of serving notice to 3d applicant. Thereafter the respondent proceeded under Section 14 to take physical possession of secured asset. The respondent followed due procedure of law and therefore the SA is liable to be dismissed,
ffi**
Page 4 of5
SA No.178l2023
Point No'(i):
Page 5 of 5
SA No.17812023
Point No.(ii):
72, communicate a copy of this order to the parties concerned and upload in the official website.
(Typed to my drctotion by the ps, corrected, signed ond pronounced by me in the open court on this the 19th doy of February, 2O2S).
99i.rsf rt-
ESHWAR KOTHE) PRESIDING OFFICER
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the applicant made out any valid ground to quash the measures initiated by the respondent against the property schedule of the application.
Whether the applicant is entitled to any relief against the proposed physical possession of the secured asset.
Whether the respondent followed the mandatory procedure under Sections 13 and 14 of the Act and the Security Interest (Enforcement) Rules, 2002.
6 provisions across 2 enactments
BVK Enterprises
B. Vinod Kumar
Boddu Vijaya Lakshmi
Edelweiss Asset Reconstruction Company Limited
RANESHWAR KOTHE
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
