Dismissed

Ms Maa Durga Fly Ash Bricks and Paver Block v. Indian Bank

DRT18 Jul 2025SA/247/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Tribunal dismissed an application questioning the validity of SARFAESI action. The court found that statutory notices under Section 13(2) and 13(4) were properly issued via post with proof of delivery, rejecting claims of non-service. The auction outcome remains undetermined.

What did the court decide?

Application to quash SARFAESI action and stay auction dismissed with costs.

Ms Maa Durga Fly Ash Bricks and Paver Block versus Indian Bank — Specific Performance | DRT (2025)

DRT,PATNA

SA 247 of 2024 !JJ

DEBTSRECOVERYTRIBUNALPATNA

¶5

PresidingOfficer:ShriKaushalendraYadav

¶6

SA- 247of 2024

¶7

M/s Maa Durga Fly Ash Bricks and Paver Blok, through its prop. Mrs. Sunita Mishra, Bedauliya Parsanva, PO - Amba, District - Aurangabad.

¶8

Mrs. Sunita Mishra, Ward No. 05, Children Paradise Public School, Bedoliya Parsanva, PO- Amba, District - Aurangabad.

¶9

.........Applicants

¶10

Versus

¶11

The Authorised Officer, Indian Bank (Earlier Allahabad), Zonal Office, Gaya.

¶12

The Branch Manager, Indian Bank (Earlier Allahabad Bank), -

¶13

Singhpur Branch Village - Kajhpa, P.O. - Dumra, District Aurangabad.

¶14

--respondents

¶15

Present: Forthe Applicant : Sh.Alok Ranjan,Advocate Forthe RespondentBank : Dr.BinodKr.Jha,Advocate

¶16

Dated:18.07.2025

¶17

JUDGMENT

¶18

I. Present application has been filed with a prayer to quash entire SARFAESIaction taken against the properties of applicant alongwith the possession notice issued.

¶19

During pendency of this application, the applicant has filed IA 682/2024 with the prayer to stay the e-auction sale on 11.12.2024 pursuant to e-auction sale notice dated 09.11.2024.

¶20

¶21

DRT,PATNA

¶22

SA 247 of 2024 [J)

¶23

The brief fact of the case is that the applicants availed Cash Credit facility to the tune of Rs.9.50lacs and Term Loan facility to the tune of Rs.14.25lacs from the respondent bank and mortgaged the property towards security of the loan. Due to default in repayment of dues of the bank, the accounts were classified as NPA on 25.03.2024. In order to recover outstanding dues the respondent bank initiated SARFAESI Action against the borrower & guarantor and issued demand notice u/s 13(2)dated 16.04.2024of the act calling upon the borrower to make the payment of Rs.19,73,395/-. Thereafter, the respondent took possession of the property by issuing Possession Notice dated 09.08.2024 u/s 13(4) of the SARFAESIAct. Aggrieved from possession notice, present SA has been filed by the applicants.

¶24

It is submitted by the Ld. Counsel of applicant that the entire loan was sanctioned under PMEGPwhich has CGTMSEcovered in which no additional securities was required but the respondent forced the applicant to deposit the Title Deeds of immovable properties. Having no option, the applicant deposited her Title Deedwith the Bank. Apart from this the Bank has also taken a fixed deposit of Rs.4 lacs as additional security. Due to lack of demand for Paver Block, the account could not be maintained properly. The respondent Bank initiated SARFAESIaction against the applicant but Demand Notice has not been served upon the applicant. The Branch Manager of the respondent Bank sent a copy of Demand Notice on the whatsapp of the husband of applicant which is not permissible in the eyes of law. In the said Demand Notice no break-up of principal and interest as well as rate of interest has been mentioned. Due to non official communication of Demand Notice, the applicant could not submit her representation/objection with the Bank. Further, the respondent Bank issued Possession Notice dated 09.08.2024 but the same was served upon the applicant on 18.08.2024 through post. The respondent Bank issued auction sale notice dated 09.11.2024fixing ~/

1/~\I./7

DRT,PATNA

SA 247 of 2024 (J)

¶29

the date of auction sale on 11.12.2024but the said notice has not been served upon the applicants. No description of the property has been mentioned in the sale notice published in the newspaper. The subsidy amount of Rs.8,75,00/- received by the Bank from Govt. has not been adjusted in the loan account.

¶30

On the contrary, ld. Counsel of the respondent bank submits that after availing the loan facilities the borrower failed and neglected to repay the amount due under facilities, hence, the accounts were classified as NPA on 25.03.2024. Subsequently, the respondent bank initiated SARFAESI Action against the borrower & guarantor with service of demand notice u/s 13(2)dated 16.04.2024.The said demand notice was sent to the applicants through post on 16.04.2024and the same was delivered to applicant on 07.05.2024as per tracking report filed with counter affidavit. No objection/representation was ever filed by the applicant against the demand notice. The bank proceeded further and taken symbolic possession of the secured asset on 09.08.2024 uls 13(4) of the act by affixing the possession notice of secured asset. The possession notice was sent to the applicant through post on 16.08.2024and the same was delivered to applicant on 18.08.2024as per tracking report annexed with counter affidavit. The possession notice was published in 'Indian Express' and 'Dainik Bhaskar' on 14.08.2024. Thereafter, the respondent Bank got valuation of the property from its approved valuer. Further, the respondent Bank issued an auction sale notice dated 02.11.2024fixing the date of auction sale on 11.12.2024.The sale notice was affixed on the secured asset and also sent to the applicants through post. The sale notice was also published in 'Indian Express' and 'Dainik Bhaskar' on 09.11.2024.

¶31

I have heard Ld. Counsel for the parties and gone through the record.

¶32

It has been alleged that the Demand Notice has not been served upon

-x/
0.. 1<br>\G

DRT,PATNA

SA 247 of 2024 [J)

¶37

the applicant however the same was sent on the whatsapp of her husband. Due to non official communication of Demand Notice, the applicant could not submit her representation/objection with the Bank. The Possession Notice was issued on 09.08.2024but the same was delivered to the applicant on 18.08.2024 through post. The auction sale notice dated 09.11.2024has also not been served upon the applicants. No description of the property has been mentioned in the sale notice published in the newspaper. The subsidy amount of Rs.8,75,00/- received by the Bank from Govt. has not been adjusted in the loan account.

¶38

On perusal of records it appears that the Demand Notice u/s 13(2)was issued on 16.04.2024and the said demand notice was sent to the applicants through post on 16.04.2024and same was delivered to applicant on 07.05.2024 as per tracking report filed with counter affidavit as annexure R/02, page 15.

¶39

The bank proceeded further and took symbolic possession of the secured asset on 09.08.2024by issuing possession notice u/s 13(4)of the act. The possession notice was affixed on the secured asset. As far as service of possession notice is concerned, the possession notice was issued on 09.08.2024the same was sent to the applicant through post on 16.08.2024which was delivered to applicant on 18.08.2024as evident from the tracking report annexed by the Bank with its counter affidavit as annexure R/04, page 19. The possession notice was published in 'Indian Express' and 'Dainik Bhaskar' on 14.08.2024.

¶40

10.The property was put on auction sale by issuing auction sale notice dated 02.11.2024fixing the date of auction sale on 11.12.2024but neither the applicants nor the respondent informed to this Court whether the sale has taken place or not in pursuance of sale notice 02.11.2024. Therefore, allegation regarding service of sale notice and valuation of the property has no force.

I-

ORT. PATNA

SA 247 of 2024 [JI

¶45

11.In view of the above discussion, no infirmity in the SARFAESIAction under challenge has been proved by the applicant. As such, the present application deserves to be dismissed.

¶46

ORDER

¶47

The application SA 247 of 2024,is dismissed with costs.

¶48

[KaushalendraYadav] Presiding Officer Debts Recovery Tribunal, Patna

¶49

Judgment signed, sealed, dated and pronounced in the opew~ on this 18TH Day of July, 2025. ~/

_~ \Q\J_

[KaushalendraYadav]

Presiding Officer

Debts Recovery Tribunal, Patna

Ms Maa Durga Fly Ash Bricks and Paver Block v. Indian Bank

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ms Maa Durga Fly Ash Bricks and Paver Block v. Indian 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

Ms Anshika Enterprises and others versus Hdfc Bank

Sagar Kirana and Dhanya Bhandar versus Gandhibagh Sahakari Bank Ltd. Nagpur

State Bank of India versus M/s S.S Fashion Points

Bank of Baroda versus Ms Ras Tools and Forging

State Bank of India versus Nar Singh

Bank of India versus M/S Thakur Medical Store