Tenson v. M v South Indian Bank
Case brief
What is this about?
Distressed Asset Manager challenged seizure of mortgaged property under SARFAESI Act Sec 14. Tribunal held incidental errors in affidavit do not vitiate order and proceedings are lawful.
What did the court decide?
Securitization Application dismissed without costs.
What the court decided
IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-2, KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT: SRI.SOVAN KUMAR DASH PRESIDING OFFICER
Dated this the 4th day of June, 2025
SECURITISATION APPLICATION NO.367/2024
Between
Tenson V.M., Vattoly House, Thoombakode, Pariyaram P.O., Chalakkudy, Thrissur-680721. …Applicant
And
- South Indian Bank, Pariyaram Branch, DO No.57, Ward No.1, Main Road, Cross Junction, Pariyaram P.O., Thrissur – 680 721. Represented by its Branch Manager.
- The Authorized Officer, South Indian Bank, Regional Office, Irinjalakkuda, AKP Centre, Christ College Road, Christ Nagar, Mukundapuram, Irinjalakkuda P.O., Thrissur – 690 005. …Defendants
This Securitization Application having been heard on
05.05.2025 in the presence of Advocate M/s. Vinod Jabar, Sadchith
Issues for consideration
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the securitization proceeding initiated under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act suffers from any illegality, defect or irregularity?
Whether the applicant is entitled to any relief in the securitization challenge proceeding?
Parties & counsel
- applicant
Tenson V.M.
Coram
Sovan Kumar Dash
Sri. Sovan Kumar Dash
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court