Dismissed

Abhish Varghese v. Axis Bank

DRT14 Feb 2025SA/337/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Debts Recovery Tribunal On's application challenging a bank's exercise of its powers under the SARFAESI Act. The court held that the applicant, who claimed to have sold property to the mortgagors, lacked any valid interest in the subject land as no document was in his favor. Consequently, he was not the aggrieved person and had no standing to resist the bank's recovery proceedings or seek any relief.

What did the court decide?

The Securitization Application is dismissed without costs as the applicant had no interest in the subject property.

Abhish Varghese versus Axis Bank — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2025)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-2, KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT: SRI.SOVAN KUMAR DASH PRESIDING OFFICER

¶3

Dated this the 14^th day of February, 2025

¶4

SECURITIZATION APPLICATION No.337/2023

¶5

Between

¶6

Abhish Varghese, Thathrathil Thambi House, Vellanikkara, Madakkathara P.O., Thrissur – 680 657. …Applicant

¶7

And

¶8

The Authorised Officer, Axis Bank Ltd., 5^th Floor, Chicago Plaza, Rajaji Road, Cochin – 682 035.

¶9

Sheeba Bhanu John, Arackal House, 32/460/45, Patturaickal, Opp.Kuttanakulangara Temple, Pookkunnam, Thrissur – 680 002.

¶10

Lamee Arackal, Flat No.7ADD, Vastra Mahal, Market Road, Next to Catholic Syrian Bank, Kochi – 682 011. …Defendants

¶11

This Securitization Application having been heard on 17.01.2025

¶12

in the presence of Advocates M/s.Sasi N. and Jithendran S. for the applicant and Advocates M/s.Paulochan Antony, Girish R., Sreejith K.

¶13

and Lincy Lazar V. for the 1^st defendant, defendants 2 and 3 being absent and stood over to this day for consideration, the Tribunal delivered the following:

¶14

SA 337/2023

¶15

¶16

F I N A L O R D E R

¶17

Challenging the securitization proceedings initiated by the defendants under the provisions of the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the SARFAESI Act’), the applicant/thirty party has filed this SA under S.17(1) of the SARFAESI Act.

¶18

Brief facts of the case :

¶19

In the SA it is claimed by the applicant that he along with his brother entered into an agreement dated 28.05.2019 with defendants 2 and 3 for selling their properties described in the SA and subsequently it was registered in favour defendants 2 and 3 on 09.01.2020. It was agreed that defendants 2 and 3 will transfer 2.2 Ares of land in Sy.No.270/1 in Mulayam Village, Thrissur Taluk as part of consideration for sale of 4.68 Ares of land of the applicant. But defendants 2 and 3 did not execute any document in respect of the said property. Hence the applicant filed civil suit bearing OS No.1379/2020 before the Munsiff Court, Thrissur. The applicant also filed Crl.M.P.No.2544/2022 in MC No.48/2022 before the CJM, Thrissur which was dismissed. Subsequently, it came to the notice of the applicant that defendants 2 and 3 availed housing loan from the defendant bank by mortgaging the said property. Pursuant to the order passed by the CJM in MC No.48/2022, the Advocate Commissioner issued notice to take possession of the property which is under challenge in this SA.

¶20

The 1^st defendant filed written statement denying the averments and claimed inter alia that defendants 2 and 3 availed

¶21

SA 337/2023

¶22

¶23

housing loan by mortgaging the subject matter property. Since they did not repay the loan, SARFAESI proceeding was initiated against the same and the CJM passed order in MC No.48/2022 for taking physical possession of the secured asset. The applicant has no locus standi to challenge the securitization proceeding initiated by the 1^st defendant against defendants 2 and 3 and hence the SA may be dismissed.

¶24

From the respective case of the applicant and 1^st defendant, the following points are emerged for adjudication in this case:

¶25

(i) Whether the securitization proceeding suffers from any illegality or defect or irregularity to intervene with the same?

¶26

(ii) Whether the applicant is entitled to get any relief in this case?

¶27

FINDINGS:

¶28

Point Nos.(i) & (ii):

¶29

For the sake of convenience, both the points, being interlinked with each other, are taken up together for adjudication. Admittedly, the applicant has no interest over the subject matter property. The applicant claims that defendants 2 and 3 agreed to sell the subject matter property to him as part consideration for the land he sold to them. It is also not disputed that defendants 2 and 3 mortgaged the said property with the 1^st defendant bank for obtaining the housing loan and due to non-repayment, 1^st defendant proceeded against defendants 2 and 3. In absence of any valid document in favour of the applicant, he cannot resist the securitization proceedings

¶30

SA 337/2023

¶31

¶32

nor he can be treated as aggrieved person to file this SA. Hence the applicant is not entitled to get any relief. Both the points are answered against the applicant.

¶33

Hence it is ordered:-

¶34

ORDER

¶35

In view of the foregoing reasons, this SA, being devoid of any merit, is hereby dismissed but in the circumstances, without costs.

¶36

(Dictated to my PA, corrected and pronounced by me in the open Tribunal on this the 14^th day of February, 2025)

¶37

[SOVAN KUMAR DASH] PRESIDING OFFICER

¶38

SA 337/2023

¶39

¶40

Documents on the part of the applicant

¶41

Annexures	Date	Particulars of doc	uments
Annexure-A1	20.10.2006	Copy of sale Ollukkara SRO.	deed No.4418/2006 of
Annexure-A2	28.05.2019	Copy of sale agre	ement.
Annexure-A3	09.01.2020	Copy of sale Ollukkara SRO.	deed No.105/2020 of
Annexure-A4	14.07.2020	Copy of OS No.1 Munsiff Court, Th	379/2020 filed before the rissur.
Annexure-A5	…	Copy of OS No.1 Sub-Court, Thriss	74/2020 filed before the ur.
Annexure-A6	27.06.2022	Copy of notice Commissioner in	issued by the Advocate MC No.48/2022.
Annexure-A7	08.06.2023	Copy of order in the CJM, Thrissur	Crl.M.P.No.2544/2022 of .
Annexure-A8	08.06.2023	Copy of order in the CJM, Thrissur	Crl.M.P.No.2545/2022 of .
Annexure-A9	07.01.2022	Copy of petition SARFAESI Act by the CJM, Thrissur	filed under S.14 of the the 1^stdefendant before .
Annexure-A10	07.01.2022	Copy of affidavit before the CJM, T	filed by the 1^stdefendant hrissur.
Annexure-A11	31.01.2022	Copy of order in the CJM, Thrissur	MC No.48/2022 passed by .
Annexure-A12	26.06.2023	Copy of notice Commissioner in	issued by the Advocate MC No.48/2022.

¶42

Documents on the part of the 1^st defendant

¶43

Annexure-B1 09.01.2020 Copy of sale deed No.105/2020 registered in favour of the 2^nd defendant and mortgaged with the 1^st defendant. Annexure-B2 04.02.2020 Copy of confirmation deed evidencing deposit of title deeds executed by the 2^nd defendant in favour of the 1^st defendant.

¶44

PRESIDING OFFICER

¶45

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-2, KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶46

PRESENT: SRI.SOVAN KUMAR DASH PRESIDING OFFICER

¶47

Dated the 14^th February, 2025

¶48

SA No.337/2023

¶49

Between Abhish Varghese, Thathrathil Thambi House, Vellanikkara, Madakkathara P.O., Thrissur – 680 657.

¶50

…Applicant

¶51

And

¶52

The Authorised Officer, Axis Bank Ltd., 5^th Floor, Chicago Plaza, Rajaji Road, Cochin – 682 035 & 2 others. …Defendants

¶53

F I N A L O R D E R

Abhish Varghese v. Axis Bank

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Abhish Varghese v. Axis Bank

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Abu Thahir P B versus South Indian Bank

Sri Uttamkumar Shyamlal versus the Authorised Officer Ugro Capital Ltd. Anr.

Shambhu Sharan Sharma versus State Bank of India

Ms Best Career Girls Inter College versus Edelweiss Assets Reconstruction Company Limited

Bank of Baroda versus Ms Maa Shail Kumari Constructions others

Jammu and Kashmir Bank Limited versus Mr Manzoor Ahmad Bhat