Dismissed

Mr Palla Kiran Kumar v. Piramal Capital and Housing Finance Limited

DRT8 Dec 2025SA/253/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The applicant challenged the recovery tribunal's proceedings to take physical possession of mortgaged property under the SARFAESI Act, alleging procedural violations. The tribunal held that the respondent creditor duly served demand and possession notices as required by law and published them in newspapers. The proceedings were found legal and valid.

What did the court decide?

Application under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act dismissed as infructuous; interlocutory applications disposed of.

Mr Palla Kiran Kumar versus Piramal Capital and Housing… — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2025)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERYTRIBUNAL- I AT HYDERABAD

¶2

DATED THIS THE 8TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2025

¶3

PRESENT: GUMMADI GoPICHAND, PRESIDING oFFICER

¶4

SA.No.253,/2024

¶5

Mr. Palla Kiran Kumar, S/o Palla John Ramulu, Aged 43 years, Occ:business, R/o H.No.5-5-17 lA/t, Bommalcal Road, Beside Urvashi Bar & Restaurant Sambhani Nagar, Mustafa Nagar, Khammam,KhammamDistrict-507001. ...Applicant

¶6

And

¶7

Piramal Capital & Housing Finance Ltd., (formerly known as Dewan Housing finance Corporation Ltd.)

¶8

Rep. by its Authorized Officer Situated at Unit No.601, 6ft floor, Amiti Building, Agastya Corporate park, Kamani Junction, Opp. Fire Station, LBS Marg, Kurla (West), Mumbai-40O 070 ... Respondent

¶9

Counsel for the Applicant Si D.Ragtnrrulu

¶10

Counsel for tle Respondent Smt. P.S. Sujata Reserued on : O6.11.2O25 Pronounced on :05.12.2O25 Uploaded on :08.12.2025

¶11

.:ORDER:-

¶12

This fi1ed the of the Act, the taking physical possession of Advocate on the lile and void. OSDEE:iW

¶13

"2. The averments made in the application, in brief, are that:

¶14

The Applicant availed Housing loan of Rs.52,34,OOO/_ and Top up loan of 12,7I,860 l- from the Respondent by creating mortgage against the schedule property. Due to Covid-19, the Applicant could not pay some instalments and the Respondent illegally declared the loan account of the Applicant as NpA without considering his request for regularization of the account. without issuing demand notice and possession notice to the Applicant, the Respondent straightaway initiated proceedings for taking physical possession of the schedule property under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act, 2002 through advocate commissioner and so the said proceedings are not legal. The impugned possession notice was not published in two leading newspapers and the same was not afrrxed on the schedule property. Hence the SA.

¶15

The Respondent filed their Reply denying all the adverse allegations made in the sA and contended that the Applicant availed housing loan and Top up loan from M/s Dewan Housing Finance Corporation Ltd.(DHFL) against the mortgage of schedule property. Later the Respondent herein had acquired Dewan Hosing Finance corporation Ltd. After availing loan, the Applicant committed default in repaying the loan dues and so, the loan account was crassified as NpA on 09.06.2022 as per the guidelines of RBI. Thereafter, the Respondent herein initiated SARFAESI proceedings and issued demand notice dt.04.08.2023 and sent the same to the Applicant and it was duly served on the Applicant. The said demand notice was also published in Business Standard and Nava Telangna daily newspapers. When the Applicant failed to comply with the demand notice, the Respondent issued possession notice dt.1g.r t.2023 and sent the said notice to the Applicant through Regd. post and the said notice was published in Nava daily newspapers and also affixed on the schedule the Respondent has followed tire procedure contempldted provisions of SARFAESI Act,2OO2 and Rules *r&.8ttffi6.ilffi, ing demand notice and possession

¶16

notice to the Applicant. Thereafter, the Respondent proceeded u/s 14 of the SARFAESI Act,20O2 for taking physical possession of the schedule property through advocate commissioner. However the warrant obtained in Crl.M.p.No.lg /24 got expired in view of the stay granted by this Hon,ble Tribunal and hence the SA becomes infructuous. Accordingly, Respondents prayed to dismiss the SA.

¶17

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

¶18

Now the points that arise for consideration are

¶19

i. wh.ether tle Appticant has establisled. ang ualid ground.s for challenging the proceedings initiated bg tle Respondent for taking

¶20

phgsical possession of tte scledule propertg tlwough aduocate commissioner?

¶21

ii. To ulnt relief?

¶22

Potnt No.lll:-

¶23

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

¶24

There is no dispute regarding the fact that the Appricant availed housing loan and rop up loan from the Dewan Housing Finance corporation Ltd. and created mortgage in respect of the schedule property towards security for the said loan and later the Dewan Housing linance Corporation Ltd. was merged with the herein. After availing the loan, the Applicant committed default in the loan dues and so, the loan account was classified as NpA. * . 08ll^EC 2025

¶25

8' The specific contention of the Applicant is that without serving demand notice and possession notice to the Appricant and without complying with Rule 8(1)&(2) of Security Interest (Enforcement) Rules 2OO2, the Respondent initiated proceedings for taking physicar possession of the schedule property through advocate commissioner u/s 14 of the SARFAESI Act,2oo2 and so, the said proceedings are not regal and varid.

¶26

9' Per contra, Respondent contended that they have dury forlowed the procedure laid down under the provisions of sARFAESI Act, 2002 and Rules made thereunder in issuing a[ the statutory notices to the Applicant and also in initiating steps for taking physicar possession of the schedule property u/s 14 ofthe SARFAESI Act, 2002.

¶27

10' In order to substantiate their contention, the Respondent filed relevant material documents along with the Repry filed by them. As per the said material documents, it is crear that the Respondent issued demand notice dt.O4.O8.2O23 and sent the same to the Applicant through Regd. post as evidenced by the postal track reports fired by the Respondent and the said notice was also published in Telugu and English daily newspapers and thus there is varid seryice of demand notice on the Applicant. Thereafter, the Respondent issued possession notice dt. 1g.11.202A u/s l3(4) of the Act, 2OO2 and the sent the same to the Applicant and others through Regd. Post' The said possession notice was pubrished in Terugu and Engrish da y newspapers as evidenced by the copies of paper publication filed by the Respondent and the said notice was arso affixed on the schedule property as depicted in the copy of photograph liled by the Respondent. Thus the Respondent has duly forowed Rure 8(1)&(2) of security Interest (Enforcement) Rules, 2002 in issuing possession notice to the Applicant.

¶28

As per the provisions"rS*gli{hr+ ofSARFAESI Act, 2oo2,afterissuance of possession notice u/" i3t4i "f the SARFAES r Act,2oo2,the secured creditoris at $b$rSf$ ffioacA the concerned District Magistrate or Chief

¶29

" Judicial Magistrate for taking physical possession of the secured asset. In the instant case, after issuing demand notice and possession notice to the Applicant, the Respondent being secured creditor, approached Ld.cJM, Khammam u/s 74 of the SARFAESI Act, 2oo2 by filing Crl'M'P'No'1912024 for appointment of advocate commissioner for taking physical possession of the schedule property. Ld.cJM, Khammam, after considering the material on record, appointed advocate commissioner. Challenging the vacate notice issued by the advocate commissioner, the Applicant filed the present sA. so the proceedings initiated by the Respondent for taking physical possession of the schedule property u/s 14 of the SARFAESI Act, 2oo2 are perfectly legal and valid.

¶30

12' So, considering all the circumstances, I am of the opinion that the Applicant is not entitled to any relief. So, I see no ground warranting interference of this Tribunal with the proceedings initiated by the Respondent for taking physical possession of the schedule property u/s 14 of the SARFAESI Act,20o2. Accordingly, this point is answered in favour of the Respondent and against the Applicant.

¶31

Point No.(ii):-

¶32

In the result, sA 2ss /24 is dismissed as there are no merits.

¶33

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

¶34

communicate a copy ofthis order to the parties concerned.

¶35

(DicJated to the P.S of December,2O25).

¶36

her, corrected, signed and pronounced. bg me in the open court on this the gh dag n sdl(c. coPr CHANDI fi,''Uffi, v. -/^&, PRESIDING OTT'ICER Aest Fegf5{rar aar.t gYDERAp,fi.

Mr Palla Kiran Kumar v. Piramal Capital and Housing Finance Limited

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mr Palla Kiran Kumar v. Piramal Capital and Housing Finance Limited

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

Yemapalla Mahipal Reddy versus Union Bank of India

State Bank of India versus Mr. Anuradha Pothuganti

State Bank of India versus Sri. Amand Rajashwar

Union Bank of India versus Dappu Yadagiri

Sairam Constructions versus Union Bank of India (Andhra Bank)

Thota Supraja D/o Thota Hanumantha Rao versus Bank of Maharashtra