B.Periyasamy v. Indian Bank
Case brief
What is this about?
DRT Chennai dismissed the applicant's SARFAESI challenge as infructuous because the scheduled auction did not materialize due to lack of bidders, rendering no challengeable measure pending within the statutory period.
What did the court decide?
SA No.216/2024 stands disposed of as having rendered infructuous.
What the court decided
SA No.216/2024
27.02.2025
1
IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHENNAI
Dated this the 27th day of February, 2025
Present: SMT. S.V. GOWRAMMA Presiding Officer
SARFAESI APPLICATION No. 216 of 2024
B. Periyasamy S/o Bettapan
1/13, Karukkanahalli Village Thandukaranahalli Post, Palacode Taluk Dharmapuri – 636 805 ….Applicant
-Vs-
- The Authorised Officer Indian Bank, Palacode Branch No.109E, First Floor, Main Road Palacode, Dharmapuri – 636 808
- Mrs. Manimegalai W/o B. Periyasamy 1/13, Karukkanahalli Village Thandukaranahalli Post, Palacode Taluk Dharmapuri – 636 805
Issues for consideration
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the SARFAESI Secure Application survives for adjudication where the auction does not materialize due to lack of bidders.
Parties & counsel
- applicant
B. Periyasamy
- respondent
Mrs. Manimegalai
- respondent
Mr. Sathishkumar
Coram
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court