The Debts Recovery Tribunal dismissed an application challenging a Section 13(3A) notice on preliminary objection that the Bank had not taken steps under Section 13(4), holding that no right to file under Section 17 arises without such steps.
Application dismissed with liberty to apply once the Bank takes steps under Section 13(4).
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.
Court of the Presiding Officer Debts Recovery Tribunal, Jaipur
Item No. 31
Case No.SA/231/2025
SURBHI KANKARIA Vs UCO BANK
Date: 23.09.2025.
Proceedings through hybrid mode Present:
Shri Vinod Kumar Singhal, Counsel for the Applicant
Shri C P Sharma, Counsel for the Respondent Bank/FI
In this matter, counsel for the bank has preliminary objection that they have not taken any steps under Section 13(4), therefore challenge made by the applicant herein to notice under Section 13(4) reply to objections made in Section 13(3A) are under challenge.
The right to file application under Section 17 only arises when any step is taken by the bank under section 13(4).
Section 13(3A) provisio reads as under:-
If, on receipt of the notice under sub-section (2), the borrower makes any representation or raises any objection, the secured creditor shall consider such representation or objection and if the secured creditor comes to the conclusion that such representation or objection is not acceptable or tenable, he shall communicate [within fifteen days] of receipt of such representation or objection the reasons for non-acceptance of the representation or objection to the borrower
Provided that the reasons so communicated or the likely action of the secured creditor at the stage of communication of reasons shall not confer any right upon the borrower to prefer an application to the Debts Recovery Tribunal under section 17 or the Court of District Judge under section 17-A.
Therefore, this SA is liable to be dismissed, accordingly, the same stands disposed of as dismissed with a liberty to the applicant as and when bank takes any steps under Section 13(4), they may challenge all securitization actions of the bank including notice under Section 13(2).
Court of the Presiding Officer Debts Recovery Tribunal, Jaipur
Accordingly, SA stands disposed off, all pending IAs also stands
disposed off, if any.
File be consigned to record as per rules. Copy of order be uploaded on website.
(Vimal Gupta) Presiding Officer Debts Recovery Tribunal, Jaipur
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the Debts Recovery Tribunal can admit an application challenging a Section 13(3A) notice when the bank has not taken steps under Section 13(4).
3 provisions across 1 enactments
SURBHI KANKARIA
UCO BANK
Vimal Gupta
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
