Dismissed

Mujeeb Rehman v. K v State Bank of India

DRT3 Oct 2025SA/318/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this securitization application, the applicant sought to set aside a possession notice and seek time to clear dues. The Tribunal noted the admitted default, the issuance of demand and possession notices, and the lack of specific challenge to those notices. It held that seeking time to clear dues does not fall under Section 13(4) of the SARFAESI Act. Consequently, the application was dismissed.

What did the court decide?

Application dismissed; no order as to costs.

Mujeeb Rehman v K versus State Bank of India — Company and Corporate | DRT (2025)

¶1

Fair Order

¶2

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL - 1 AT ERNAKULAM

¶3

DATED THIS 03^th DAY OF OCTOBER, 2025

¶4

PRESENT: Su. WILLYAHM, B.Sc., M.L. [DISTRICT JUDGE - Retd] PRESIDING OFFICER

¶5

S.A No. 318 of 2023

¶6

Between

¶7

Mujeeb Rehman V.K., S/o. Muhammed, Valakkundil House, Ally P.O., Mukkom, Kozhikode -673 602.

¶8

--- Applicant

¶9

And

¶10

State Bank of India Calicut Branch,

¶11

1^st Floor, Bank Road,

¶12

Mananchira, Kozhikode – 673 602,

¶13

Rep. by Authorized Officer.

¶14

State Bank of India NIT Branch, Kozhikode,

¶15

Rep. by its Branch Manager.

¶16

--- Defendants

¶17

This Securitization Application coming on 13.08.2025 for final hearing before me in the presence of Ms. Cicily George, Counsel for the defendants and the Counsel for the applicant having failed to appear and advance argument and upon hearing the argument of the learned Counsels for the defendants and upon perusing the material on records, this Tribunal delivered the following:

¶18

SA No.318 of 2023

¶19

O R D E R

¶20

This Securitisation Application was filed on 17.06.2023 seeking to set aside Annexure-A1 possession notice and to direct the defendants to keep in abeyance the possession of the secured asset and to direct the defendants to grant some time to clear off the entire dues after deducting penal interest and hidden charges and award cost of the application to the applicant.

¶21

Availment of over draft facility for an amount of Rs.20 lakhs on 30.09.2019 from the 2^nd defendant bank upon creation of equitable mortgage over the applicant’s property admeasuring an extent of 19.55 cents of land with improvements therein in Sy. No.2/1003 in Koodaranghl Village, Kozhikode District is admitted by the applicant.

¶22

The applicant has also admitted the availment of pre-approved COVID-19 loan to the tune of Rs.3 lakhs from the 2^nd defendant bank.

¶23

The applicant has admitted his default in repayment of the outstanding loan due. Hence, the loan account of the applicant came to be classified as Non-Performing Asset on 31.03.2023.

¶24

Therefore, Annexure D1 demand notice dated 4.4.2023 was issued to the applicant calling upon him to pay the outstanding loan amount due within a period of 60 days from the date of receipt of the demand notice. Annexure D2 copy of acknowledgment card evidences the services of demand notice on the applicant. According to the defendant, objection or representation to the demand notice was not sent by the applicant.

¶25

Therefore, the defendants issued Annexure D3 possession notice dated 15.3.2023 for symbolically taking physical possession of the secured asset. The applicant has admitted the issuance of possession notice. He has also produced copy of possession notice as Annexure A1.

¶26

The applicant has not raised any specific challenge in respect of issuance of the possession notice. However, the defendants have produced Annexures D4 and D5 copies of paper publication and Annexure D6 copy of photograph in order to prove their contention that possession notice was published in ‘Mathrubhoomi’ Edition dated

¶27

Page 2 of 4

¶28

SA No.318 of 2023

¶29

26.2.2023 and ‘Hindu’ Edition dated 26.2.203, which are having vide circulation.

¶30

The defendants have produced the copy of application Annexure D7 filed in CMP No.1197/2023 before the Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Kozhikode and copy of the order Annexure D8 passed in CMP No.1197/2023 appointing advocate commissioner to take physical possession of the secured asset. But the applicant has not averred anything in the SA with regard to the aforesaid measures. He has also not sought for any relief against the aforesaid measures. Hence, this Tribunal is not inclined to have a discussion about the aforesaid measures.

¶31

One of the reliefs sought for by the applicant in the SA is to direct the defendants to grant some time to clear off the entire dues after deducting penal interest and hidden charges. The above relief does not fall under any of the measures referred to in Section 13 (4) of the SARFAESI Act, 2002. It is for the applicant to approach the 2^nd defendant bank seeking for the aforesaid reliefs.

¶32

The applicant has failed to prove his case so as to get the reliefs sought for in the SA.

¶33

Resultantly, SA No.318/2023 stands dismissed. However, there shall be no order as to costs.

¶34

Dictated to Steno, taken down, transcribed, typed by him, corrected and pronounced by me in the open court on this the 3^rd day of October, 2025.

¶35

(Su. WILLYAHM) PRESIDING OFFICER

al/

Page 3 of 4

SA No.318 of 2023

List of documents filed by the Applicant along with the S.A.

¶40

Sl.	Date	Particulars
No.
1.	06.06.2023	True copy of the possession notice	Annexure-A1
		issued by the1^st defendant.

¶41

List of documents filed by the defendants along with the written statement

¶42

Sl. No.	Date	Particulars
1.	04.04.2023	Copy of the demand notice applicant	Annexure-D1
2.	08.04.2023	Copy of acknowledgment card signed by the 2^nd applicant	Annexure-D2
3.	15.06.2023	Copy of the possession notice issued by the1^st defendant	Annexure-D3
4.	22.06.2023	Copy of paper publication in Mathrubhumidaily	Annexure-D4
5.	22.06.2023	Copy of paper publication in Hindu daily	Annexure-D5
6.	16.06.2023	Copy of photographs showing the affixture ofpossession notice.	Annexure-D6
7.	11.07.2023	Copy of CMP No.1197/2023 filed before the Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Kozhikode	Annexure-D7
8.	19.07.2023	Copy of the order in CMP No.1197/2023 of Chief Judicial Magistrate Court,Kozhikode.	Annexure-D8

¶43

(Su. WILLYAHM) PRESIDING OFFICER

¶44

al/-

¶45

Page 4 of 4

Mujeeb Rehman v. K v State Bank of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mujeeb Rehman v. K v State Bank of India

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

State Bank of India versus Nirupma Trehan Pati and Anr.

Uco Bank versus M/S Varun Enterprises

Hdfc Bank versus Ravi Shankar Singh

Punjab National Bank versus Jalaur Singh

Gurdev Kaur versus Punjab National Bank

Soniya P S versus Idbi Bank