Dismissed

Ms Aalasyam Ravi Commission Merchant Rep by its Prop Aalasyam Ravi v. Axis Bank

DRT11 Jun 2025SA/195/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debt Recovery Tribunal I, Hyderabad, examined an application under Section 17 of the SARFAESI Act, 2002 challenging a possession notice and physical possession proceedings initiated by Axis Bank. The Bank demonstrated compliance with statutory requirements, including service of demand and possession notices, their publication, and due execution before the Magistrate. The Tribunal held that the

What did the court decide?

Application dismissed; possession notice and proceedings under Section 14 held legal and valid.

Ms Aalasyam Ravi Commission Merchant Rep by its… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2025)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL^- I AT HYDERABAD

¶2

DATED I-HIS THE 1 1^T DAY OF JUNE, 2C-25

¶3

PRESENT: GUMMADI GOPICHAND, PRESIDING OFFICER

¶4

sA.No. 195/2C^23

¶5

M/s Alasyam Ravi Commission Merchant, Rep. by its Prop.Mr.Alasyam Ravi, S/o PanakaluAlasyam, aged 52 years, Occ:business, H.No.4-5-1531 I I A, BijjalavariThota, Near Prakash Nagar, Gandhi chowk, Khammam-507001.

¶6

... Applicant

¶7

And

¶8

Axis Bank, Rep.by its Authorized Officer d.No.5-2-183/ 184, 3'a floor, Modi Squre, Ranigunj, Sec.bad-500 003.

¶9

.... Respondent

¶10

Counsel for the Applicant

¶11

Counsel for the Resporudent Bank

¶12

Sri D.Raghauulu Si M.Sriniuasa Reddy

¶13

-:ORDER:-

¶14

This application is filed by the Applicant u/s.17 of the SARFAESI Act, 2OO2, challenging the Possession Notice dt.06.05.2023 issued by the Respondent and also the steps initiated by the Respondent for taking physical possession of the schedule property through advocate commissioner and to declare the same as illegal and void.

¶15

The averments made in the application, in brief, are that: et5q.*

¶16

The A rr av*iiiiid tolft the Respondent by creating mortgage ln re i:' t rty. In view of the ill-health of the ,' A

¶17

Appl!qarr t, tfl e]aflfillc2&$ .o.ifa ot pay some instalments. Without w'*qw

¶18

issuing any demand notice u/s 13(2) of the SARFAESI Act, 2OO2, straightaw&y, the Respondent issued the impugned possession notice dt.o6.05.2o23 uls 13(4) of the Act, 2002 and the said possession notice was not affixcd on thc schcdule property and it was not published in two daily newspapers. During the pendency of the SA, the Respondent approached Ld.cJM, Khammam and obtained orders for taking physical possession of the schedule property through advocate commissioner and the advocate commissioner issued notice dt.23.01.2024 to ttre Applicant to vacate the schedule premises. Hence the SA.

¶19

The Respondent filed their Reply and additional Reply denying all the advcrsc allcgations made in thc sA and contended that after availing loan from thc Rcspondent, the Applicant failed to repay the loan dues and So, the loan account was classified as NPA. Accordingly, the Respondent issued demand notice dt.13.01.2023 u/s 13(2) of the SARFAESI AcL, 2OO2 and sent the said notice to the address of thc Applicant through rcgd. Post and the said notice was also publishcd in Nava 'lclangana and Financiai Express daily newspapers.Thereafter, the Respondent issued possession notice dt.06.05.2023 u/s 13(a) of the Act, 2OO2 and the said notice was sent to the Applicant through Regd.Post. The said possession notice was affixed on thc schcdulc propcrty and it was also published in two daily newspapers. After issuing thc possession notice, the Respondent approached Ld. CJM, Khammam by filing Crl.M.P.N o.2612023 for appointment of advocate commissioner for taking physical possession of the schedule property. The said advocate commissioner appointed by Ld.C.IM, Khammam issued noticc dt.23.1o.2024 to the Applicant to vacatc thc schedule property. Instead of vacating the scheduie

¶20

premises t filed the present SA and obtained stay orders.
Acco nk prayed to dismiss the SA.
.#
*
H 11Juil&t :
6 ef/
$tA,
\ -.:',' '&ii

¶21

Heard Ld. Counscl for the Applicant and Ld. Counsel for the Respondent and perused the material brought on record.

¶22

Now the points that arise for consideration are

¶23

uthether the Applicarut has established anA ualid grounds for challenging the Possession Notice dt.06.O5.2023 issued by the Respondent and also the steps initiated by the Respondent for taking physicalpossessioru of the schedule propertg?

¶24

ii. To what relief ?

¶25

Point No.(if :-

¶26

During the course of arguments, Ld. counsel for the Applicant and Ld. Counsel for the lRespondent reiterated their respective versions as stated supra.

¶27

The undisputed facts of the case are that the Applicant availed loan from the Respondent and created mortgage in respect of the schedule property to secure the said loan. Thcreafter, the Applicant committed default in repaying the loan dues and so, the loan account was classified as NPA

¶28

The specific contention of the Applicant is that the Respondent without issuing any demand noticc, straight.away issued the impugned Possession notice dt.06.05.2023 and the said possession notice was neither affixcd on the schedule property nor published in two leading newspaper espondent also initiated steps for taking physica ulc property without following the due proce s^{lllutt&6 *}

¶29

Per contra, Rcspondenl contended that they have duly followed the procedure laid down under the provisions of SARFABSI Act, 2OO2 and Rules made thereunder in issuing demand notice and possession notice and also in taking steps u/s 14 of the SARITAESI Act, 2O02 for taking physical possession of the schedule property.

¶30

In order to substantiate their contention, the Respondent filed relevant material documents along with the Reply filed by them. As per the said documents, it is clear that the Respondent issued demand notice dt.13.01.2023 uls 13(2) of the SARFAESI Act, 2OO2 and sent the said notice to the Applicant through Regd. Post and the said notice was received by the Applicant as evidenced by the postal acknowledgements Iiled by the Bank. In fact, thc Respondent also published the said demand noticc in two daily newspapers. Thereafter, the Respondent issued possession noticc dt.06.05.2023 and the Applicant received the said notice. Thc said possession notice was published in English and Telugu daily newspapers as evidenced by the copies of paper publication Iiled by the Respondent and the said notice was also affixed on the schedulc property as depicted in the photographs filed by the Respondent. Thus, thc Respondent has scrupulously followed Rule 8(1)&(2) of Security Interest (Enforcement) Rules, 2OO2 in issuing possession notice to the Applicant.

¶31

After issuance of possession notice u/s 13(4) of the SARFAESI Act, 2oo2, as per the provisions of Section 14 of SARITABSI Act, 2OO2, the secured creditor is at liberty to approach the concerned District Magistrate or Chief Judicial Magistrate for taking physical possession of the secured asset. In ttrc instant casc, aftcr issuing demand notice and possession notrce to t cant, the Respondent approached Ld. CJM, Khamm SARFAESI Act, 2OO2 for appointment of ad ing physical possession of the schedule pro, r going through the record, appointed adv : advocalc r:ommissioner issued notice 4

¶32

dt.23.01.2024 to the Applicant for vacating the schedule property and so, the said notice is pcrfcctly legal and valid.

¶33

So, considering all the circumstances, I am of the opinion that impugned possession notice dt.06.05.2023 and the proceedings initiated by the Respondent before the DJM, Khammam ufs 14 of the SARFAESI Act, 2OO2 for taking physical possession of thc schedule property are quite legal and strictly in accordance with the provisions of SARFAESI Act, 2OO2 and there are no violations. Accordingly, this point is answered in favour of the Respondent and against the Appticant.

¶34

Point No.(ii):

¶35

t2. In the result, sA 19512023 is dismissed as there are no merits. conscquently, the Intcrlocutory Applications, pending if any, shall stand disposed of. No ordcr as to costs.

¶36

consequently, the Interlocutory Applications, pending if any, shall stand disposed of. No order as to costs.

¶37

communicate a copy of this order to the parties concerned.

¶38

(Dictated to the P.S tratrscribed by her, c'orrected, siqned. and. pronouncecl b11 me in the open court on this the j lth dag ofJune, 2025).

¶39

%%
11Jun2B5 :
; *
r$.
$r''t', r,,,^ouu}-#fl

¶40

sd/ - (G. GOPr CHAND) PRESIDING OFFICER

¶41

Ai456'TRUECOPY
;rt6,#;r:
9or- t . H Y D E F,4,4.{: t.D.

Ms Aalasyam Ravi Commission Merchant Rep by its Prop Aalasyam Ravi v. Axis Bank

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ms Aalasyam Ravi Commission Merchant Rep by its Prop Aalasyam Ravi v. Axis Bank

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

State Bank of India versus Mr. Bheesetti Ramu

Smt Rizwana Begum versus Union Bank of India

Kompelli Jyothi versus Union Bank of India

Union Bank of India versus M/S. Suryodaya Infra Projects (I) India Private Ltd.

State Bank of India versus Ms. Kankipati Niharika

State Bank of India versus Sri. Muttagi Srisailam