Allowed

Diva Beauty Cosetics Rep by Its Prop Mrs Raja Mpeta Kashvi v. Unity Small Finance Bank

DRT23 Dec 2025SA/279/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

DRT Hyderabad allowed the Securitisation Application filed by loan applicants assailing the Respondent Bank's attempt to take physical possession of mortgaged property. The court set aside notices and proposed possession action due to alleged lack of compliance with statutory procedures and absence of evidence.

What did the court decide?

Set aside all notices issued under the SARFAESI Act and Rules, including the proposed physical possession by the bank pursuant to the Advocate Commissioner Notice dated 12.06.2025.

Diva Beauty Cosetics Rep by Its Prop Mrs Raja Mpeta Kashvi versus… — Cheque Dishonour | DRT (2025)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL AT HYDERABAD

¶2

DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF DECEMBER, 2025

¶3

PRESENT: SH. RAMESHWAR KOTHE, B.COM,^{L.LB. (HONS.), M.A.} PRESIDING OFFICER

¶4

SECURITISATION APPLICATION NO. 279^OF 2025

¶5

Between:

¶6

M/s. Diva Beauty Cosmetics Rep by its Prop: Mrs. Rajampeta Kashvi H. No.4-7-9l2/1, Indira Nagar Uppal Shanti Garden Hyderabad, Telangana-500076.

¶7

Mr. Syed Abdul Rahim S/o Late Syed Mohammed^HaYath H. No. 4-7-9/2/1, Indira^Nagar Uppal Shanti Garden Hyderabad, Telangana-500076.

¶8

Mrs. Rajampeta Kashvi W/o Syed Abdul Rahim H. No. 4-7-9l2/1, Indira Nagar Uppal Shanti Garden Hyderabad, Telanga na-500076.

¶9

Mr. Syed Mohammed HaYath^(Died) H. No.4-7-9l2/1, Indira^Nagar Uppal Shanti Garden ....".Applicants. Hyderabad, Telangana-500076. And Unity Small Finance^Bank Authorised Officer, Zonal^Office Manikonda, Gachibowli^Branch ......ResPondent' Hyderabad. 7ry**

¶10

SA.No.279/2025

¶11

Counsel for the Applicant Respondent

Mr. Remidala Kotaiah

Ex-parte.

-:ORDER:-

The present Securitization Application is filed by the Applicants u/s. t7 of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 assailing the action of respondent bank to take the physical possession of the Application schedule property vide Advocate Commissioner Notice dated 12.06.2025 pursuant to orders in Crl.M.p. No.76 of 2025 on the file of the learned II Additional Senior Civil Judge, Medchal-Malkajgiri at Kushaiguda, in pursuance of possession notice under Section 13(4) dated 23.I2.2024.

¶16

2, The case of the applicant in brief is:

¶17

Applicant No.1, engaged in beauty products business, availed a loan of Rs.30,00,000/- against the mortgage of SA schedule property for development of her business on 31.01.2022. Due to Pandemic situation, applicant suffered huge losses in the business, affecting the repayment schedule. Applicant paid substantial amounts with the respondent bank and the loan account is quite regular. Respondent bank illegally declared the loan account as NPA without considering applicant,s requests to allow deposit of overdue instalments. Instead, took coercive steps to take physical possession of the property against the law and principles of natural justice. Respondent proceeded with the impugned proceedings without issuing demand notice u/s 13(2) and possession notice u/s 13(4) read with Rules B(1) and B(2). The Advocate Commissioner tried to take the physical possession of the subject property without hqvjng any right and (_),//w-,,"*

¶18

SA.No.279/2025

¶19

also without considering the applicant's^{presentsituation. If the} Advocate Commissioner executes the Warrant in Crl.M.P.No.76 of 2025, applicant will deprive of her^{residential propertyand} will be put to irreparable loss and injury. With no other alternative left, applicant approached this Tribunal for necessary relief.

¶20

Respondent was set exparte on 77.1O.2O25 for^non- representation.

¶21

Heard the Ld. Counsel appearing for the^{Applicantand perused} the material^placed on record.

¶22

In the absence of any evidence material as to^{compliance of} provislons of the Act and the Rules, lt is to be construed that there is non-compliance. Under such circumstances,^the present Securitisation Application deserves to be allowed by setting aside all the notices issued under the SARFAESI^Act includlng the action of Respondent Bank to take the^physical possession of the application schedule property vide Advocate Commlssioner

¶23

In the result, the SA is allowed by setting^aside all the^notices issued under the SARFAESI Act and the^Rules there^under including the^proposed action of Respondent^Bank to take^the physical possession of the property pursuant to Advocate commissioner Notice dated 72.06.2025 in^{pursuanceof the} orders in Crl.M.P.No.76 of 2025 on the^file of^{the leaned II-} Additional senior civil Judge, I4edchal-Malkajgiri at^Kushaiguda.