Dismissed

Sheela Ps alias Sheela Ravi v. Federal Bank

DRT23 Apr 2025SA/405/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal dismissed the securitization application filed by legal heirs seeking to set aside notice declaring property as secured asset and quash proceedings. The Tribunal rejected contentions regarding loan agreement registration, confirmed the property as secured upon admission, and held no prior notice is mandated before NPA classification.

What did the court decide?

Application dismissed; no order as to costs. Notice dated 5.4.2019 and subsequent possession measures upheld.

Sheela Ps alias Sheela Ravi versus Federal Bank — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2025)

¶1

Fair Order

¶2

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL - 1 AT ERNAKULAM

¶3

DATED THIS 23^rd DAY OF APRIL, 2025

¶4

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

¶5

S.A No. 405 of 2024

¶6

Between

¶7

Sheela P.S. alias Sheela Ravi,

¶8

W/o. late Ravi K.K., Puthenveli House, Thekkumbhagom

¶9

South Vellarappilly P.O. Sreemoolanagaram, Ernakulam – 683 580.

¶10

Naveenraj P.R., S/o. late Ravi K.K., Puthenveli House, Thekkumbhagom South Vellarappilly P.O. Sreemoolanagaram, Ernakulam – 683 580.

¶11

Navya Ravi, D/o. late Ravi K.K., Puthenveli House, Thekkumbhagom South Vellarappilly P.O. Sreemoolanagaram,

¶12

Ernakulam – 683 580.

¶13

--- Applicants

¶14

And

¶15

The Federal Bank Ltd. LCRD/Ernakulam Division, Ground Floor, Federal Towers, Marine Drive, Cochin-31 Represented by its Authorized Officer.

¶16

--- Defendant

¶17

SA No.405 of 2024

¶18

This Securitization Application coming on 18.10.2024 for final hearing before me in the presence of Mr. Rajeesh K.G., Counsel appearing for the Applicants and Mr. Peter Tharakan, Advocate appearing for the defendant bank and upon hearing arguments of learned Counsels for both the parties and upon perusing the material on records, this Tribunal delivered the following:

¶19

O R D E R

¶20

This Securitisation Application was filed on 29.05.2024 seeking to set aside Annexure-A1 notice pursuant to Annexure-A4 Advocate Commissioner and to declare that the property of 18 cents described in Annexure-A1 is not a secured asset and to declare that the proceedings against 2^nd and 3^rd applicants are illegal and unwarranted to the proceedings and allow the cost of the proceedings.

¶21

Late Mr. Ravi K.K. who is the husband of the 1^st applicant and father of 2^nd and 3^rd applicants was the Proprietor of M/s. Aum Traders. The applicants having admitted the availment of credit facility by late Mr. Ravi K.K. in the year 2016 from the defendant bank, are not entitled to raise contentions on a flimsy ground that loan agreement was not registered u/s 17 (1) (b) of the Registration Act. Lon agreement need not be registered under the above said provisions of the Act. Hence this Tribunal does not find any substance in the above contention of the applicants.

¶22

It is admitted by the applicants in the S.A that the property of the 1^st applicant had been given as the security for the aforesaid availment of credit facility. Hence, the relief sought for by the applicants in the SA to declare the property admeasuring 18 cents described in Annexure-A1 demand notice is not the secured asset, is not tenable. Default in repayment of the loan account is also admitted by the applicants in the S.A.

¶23

Hence, Annexure-A1 demand notice dated 5.4.2019 was issued to the applicants calling upon them to repay the outstanding loan due within a period of 60 days from the date of receipt of the demand notice. The issuance of the demand notice is admitted by the applicants. Further, the defendant bank has produced Annexure-D2 to D4 copies of postal acknowledgment cards evidencing the delivery of the demand notice to the applicants. Indisputably, the applicants neither sent any objection/representation to the demand notice nor did they clear off their liability due to the defendant bank.

¶24

The provisions under Section 13 (2) of the SARFAESI Act 2002 neither contemplates nor does it mandate the issuance of prior notice to the borrowers/guarantors before classification of loan account as

¶25

Page 2 of 5

¶26

SA No.405 of 2024

¶27

NPA. Hence, the contention of the applicant that no prior notice was given to them before classification of loan account as NPA does not hold good.

¶28

Subsequently, the defendant bank approached the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate Court (MPs/MLAs), Ernakulam and filed Annexure-A2 affidavit and A3 application under Section 14 (1) of the SARFAESI Act, 2002. Order came to be passed appointing Advocate Commissioner for taking physical possession of the secured asset. The Advocate Commissioner issued Annexure-A4 notice dated 19.4.2024 to the applicants informing them that he would take physical possession of the secured asset on 11.05.2024. The applicants having aggrieved against the above measures filed this SA seeking the reliefs stated supra.

¶29

On perusal of the averment in the SA it is noticed that there is no specific averment in the SA that the affidavit Annexure-A2 filed in MC 803/2023 is not in compliance of the statutory requirements contemplated under Clause (i) to (ix) to the provisions of Section 14 (1) of the SARFAESI Act 2002. It is also not the contention of the applicants that the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate (MPs/MLAs), Ernakulam passed order without having verified the contents of the affidavit and having satisfied over the same for taking physical possession of the secured asset. The applicants have also not produced the copy of the order passed in MC No.803/2023.

¶30

The applicants are the legal heirs of the deceased borrower Mr.K.K. Ravi. Therefore, they cannot be said as unnecessary parties to the measures initiated by the defendant bank.

¶31

The applicants have failed to establish their case so as to get the reliefs sought for in the S.A.

¶32

In the result, S.A No.405 of 2024 stands dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶33

Dictated to Steno, taken down, transcribed, typed by him, corrected and pronounced by me in the open court on this the 23^rd day of April, 2025.

¶34

(Su. WILLYAHM) PRESIDING OFFICER

Mj/

Page 3 of 5

SA No.405 of 2024

S C H E D U L E

District : Ernakulam Sub District : Sreemoolanagaram Taluk : Aluva Village : Thekkumbhagam Sy. No. : 89/2, 3 Re. Sy.No. : 141/6 Extent : 7.29 Ares (18 cents)

¶40

Description

¶41

All that part and parcel of the property having an extent of 18 cents in Sy. No.89/2,3 situated at Thekkumbhagam village, Aluva Taluk in Ernakulam District.

¶42

Boundaries

¶43

East	: Property of Indira Amma
North	: Property of Poongudi Ramesan
West	: Road
South	: Property of Indira Amma

¶44

(Su. WILLYAHM) PRESIDING OFFICER

¶45

Page 4 of 5

¶46

SA No.405 of 2024

¶47

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

¶48

Sl. No.	Date	Particulars
1.	05.04.2019	True copy of Sec.13(2) notice issued by defendant.	Annexure-A1
2.	21.08.2023	True copy of the affidavit in MC No.803 of 2023 filed by the defendant before the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate Court (MPs/MLAs)Ernakulam	Annexure-A2
3.	21.08.2023	True copy of the petition in MC No.803 of 2023 filed by the defendant before the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate Court (MPs/MLAs)Ernakulam	Annexure-A3
4.	19.04.2024	True copy of the notice issued by the Advocate Commissioner through registered post.	Annexure-A4
5.	---	True copy of the postal cover showing date ofservice of Annexure-A4.	Annexure-A5
6.	11.08.2023	True copy of the notice issued by the defendant toapplicants.	Annexure-A6

¶49

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

¶50

Sl. No.	Date	Particulars
1.	05.04.2019	photocopy of notice under Sec.13(2) issuedagainst theapplicants.	Annexure-D1
2.	---	Photocopy of the postal acknowledgment card evidencing the delivery of Sec.13(2) notice to the 1^st applicant SheelaP.S.	Annexure-D2
3.	----	Photocopy of the postal acknowledgment card evidencing the delivery of Sec.13(2) notice to the 2^nd applicantNaveenrajP.R.	Annexure-D3
4.	---	Photocopy of the postal acknowledgment card evidencing the delivery of Sec.13(2) notice to the 3^rd applicantNavya Ravi.	Annexure-D4

¶51

(Su. WILLYAHM) PRESIDING OFFICER

¶52

Mj/

¶53

Page 5 of 5

Sheela Ps alias Sheela Ravi v. Federal Bank

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sheela Ps alias Sheela Ravi v. Federal Bank

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

Moitheen versus Urban Co. operative Bnak Ltd.

Mr Afjal Hossain Mondal versus Bank of Baroda

Panchu Pramanik versus Punjab National Bank

Beenamol K versus State Bank of India

M/s S.S Constructions Through its Proprietor Shri Sameer Sheikh Shafi Sheikh versus Capri Global Capital Limited

Sri Mahendra Pradhan And Ors. versus Punjab and Sind Bank