Dismissed

Sneha Rajawat v. Iifl Home Finance Limited

DRT23 Sept 2025SA/475/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal, Jaipur dismissed an application filed by Sneha Rajawat. The applicant, a third party claiming possession under an unregistered agreement to sale, sought to challenge notices. The Tribunal held that an unregistered agreement does not confer rights to challenge such notices and dismissed the application.

What did the court decide?

The application stands dismissed. All pending interim applications (IAs) also stand disposed of.

Sneha Rajawat versus Iifl Home Finance Limited — Property and Title | DRT (2025)

¶1

Court of the Presiding Officer Debts Recovery Tribunal, Jaipur

¶2

Item No. 35

¶3

Case No.SA/475/2025

¶4

SNEHA RAJAWAT Vs IIFL HOME FINANCE LIMITED

¶5

Date: 23.09.2025.

¶6

Proceedings through hybrid mode Present:

¶7

Shri Aditya Joshi, Counsel for the Applicant

¶8

Ms. Surbhi Bairathi, Counsel for the Respondent Bank/FI

¶9

In this matter, this SA has been filed claiming that the applicant is having an agreement to sale and they have got possession of the property on the basis of the said agreement to sale.

¶10

The said agreement to sale is not registered. Counsel is relying upon the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the matter of Ghanshyam etc, but unregistered agreement to sale does not confer any right/interest in the property.

¶11

If the applicant wished to claim his right in the said agreement to sale, they could have well have gone and filed separate specific performance suit before the Civil Court to secure their rights.

¶12

Counsel for the applicant tries to show some whatsapp message of the bank and unsigned letter. Whatsapp is not a means of communication to be admitted and any correspondence has to be in writing and duly signed.

¶13

Counsel for the Respondent submits that there is no settlement which has been entered into with the present applicant.

¶14

Court of the Presiding Officer Debts Recovery Tribunal, Jaipur

¶15

In these circumstances, the Tribunal is of firm opinion that agreement to sale which is unregistered, not acted upon by invoking provisions of specific performance, does not give the right to applicant to challenge the notices. The applicant also submits that the account with the bank of the borrowers is not NPA and he is ready and willing to settle on behalf of borrowers. He is third party. Borrowers are not coming.

¶16

This SA deserves to be dismissed. Accordingly the same stands disposed of as dismissed. All pending IAs also stands disposed off, if any.

¶17

File be consigned to record as per rules. Copy of order be uploaded on website.

¶18

(Vimal Gupta) Presiding Officer Debts Recovery Tribunal, Jaipur

Sneha Rajawat v. Iifl Home Finance Limited

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sneha Rajawat v. Iifl Home Finance Limited

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ms Sona Wines versus the Khamgaon Urban Co-Op Bank Ltd.

Canara Bank versus Ravindra Gajanan Fadnis

Canara Bank versus Suresh Ghasiram Soner

Idfc Bank Limited versus Ms Ganpati Engineering

Idfc Bank Limited versus P M Textiles

Annu Sharma and Other versus India Shelter Finance Corporation Limited