Smt Mamta Pal Wife of Late Shri Neeraj Kumar v. State Bank of India
Case brief
What is this about?
The Tribunal set aside an auction sale of a residential property pursuant to Section 13(4) of the SARFAESI Act. It found the sale fatal due to a discrepancy in the EMD submission date between notices and because the property was significantly undervalued by the bank.
What did the court decide?
Sale set aside; Bank directed to refund consideration with 10% interest and pay Rs.25,000 compensation; Auction Purchaser directed to return title deeds.
What the court decided
SA/329/2024
DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-II, CHANDIGARH
SA/329/2024
SMT MAMTA PAL WIFE OF LATE SHRI NEERAJ KUMAR Vs STATE BANK OF INDIA AND OTHERS
07.11.2025 ITEM NO.48
Argued by: Mr. Nitin Grover Advocate along with Smt. Mamta Pal, Applicant in person (SA) Mr. Gaurav Singla Advocate for the Respondent Bank Mr. Aman Gupta, Auction Purchaser in person
Smt. Mamta Pal (Applicant) has filed this Securitization Application under Section 17 of the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (SARFAESI Act), against the Authorised Officer, State Bank of India and others (Respondents).
- Admittedly, vide sanction letter dated 29.01.2014, SBI had sanctioned a Home Loan of Rs.39,15,000/- to the Applicant and her deceased husband, Mr. Neeraj Kumar. Applicant and her husband had to buy a flat from a builder. The loan was secured by the mortgage of 3BHK apartment No.301, Block-B1, Third-floor, Maya Garden, City Zirakpur measuring 1530 sq. feet. Applicant and her husband could not make the repayment and the Bank declared the account of the Applicant NPA. On 13.08.2022, Bank declared the account NPA and on 22.08.2022, issued a notice under Section 13(2) of the Act to Applicant. Applicant did not make the repayment and the Bank served the notice under Section 13(4) of the Act on 02.12.2022. Bank also obtained the order under Section 14 from DM and a notice dated 10.10.2024 was issued in this connection. SBI put up the property for auction. However, there was no bidder. The Bank again put up the property for auction vide notice dated 17.02.2024. The auction was fixed up for 14.03.2024. Mr. Aman Gupta was the highest bidder who
Issues for consideration
3 issues framed by the court
Whether discrepancy between the auction notice served on the applicant and the one published in newspapers vitiates the sale.
Whether the Bank undervalued the mortgaged property leading to a set-aside of the auction.
Whether the applicant can be granted relief to repay dues if she chooses to do so.
Parties & counsel
- applicant
Smt Mamta Pal
- respondent
State Bank of India and others
Coram
ANJ
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court