Dismissed

Mammu v. versus Punjab National Bank

DRT17 Jun 2025SA/552/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This Tribunal dismissed the Securitization Application filed by borrowers to set aside an order appointing a District Collector to take physical possession of secured assets. The Court held that the respondent bank validly fulfilled statutory requirements under the SARFAESI Act. Findings were made regarding the authenticity of the demand notice and compliance with service timelines.

What did the court decide?

Application dismissed; no order as to costs.

Mammu v versus Punjab National Bank — Company and Corporate | DRT (2025)

¶1

Fair Order

¶2

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL - 1 AT ERNAKULAM

¶3

DATED THIS 17^th DAY OF JUNE, 2025

¶4

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

¶5

S.A No. 552 of 2023

¶6

Between

¶7

Mammu V., Excel Cottage, Kodampuzha Road,

¶8

Ferook P.O., Kozhikode.

¶9

Habeeb Rahiman V.,

¶10

Chooramukkil House,

¶11

Ferook P.O., Kozhikode.

¶12

Hashim V.,

¶13

Chooramukkil House,

¶14

Ferook P.O., Kozhikode.

¶15

--- Applicants

¶16

And

¶17

The Authorized Officer, Punjab National Bank, Circle SASTRA Center, Shathabdi Bhavan, Mini By Pass Road, Govindapura, Kozhikode – 673 016.

¶18

--- Defendant

¶19

This Securitization Application coming on 05.02.2025 for final hearing before me in the presence of Mr. Jithendran, Counsel appearing for the Applicants and Mr. Rajeev, Advocate appearing for the defendant and upon hearing arguments of learned Counsels for

¶20

SA No.552 of 2023

¶21

both the parties and upon perusing the material on records, this Tribunal delivered the following:

¶22

O R D E R

¶23

This Securitisation Application was filed on 11.09.2023 seeking to set aside Annexure – A6 CJM order and to order payment of compensation to the applicants for the losses sustained by the illegal act of the defendant.

¶24

The applicants have admitted the availment of overdraft facility to the tune of Rs.75,00,000/- from the defendant bank upon creation of equitable mortgage over their lands admeasuring 80 Cents comprised in Re. Sy. No.385/6 in Feroke Village, Kozhikode Taluk, Kozhikode District and the land admeasuring 31.37 Cents with building situated in Re. Sy. Nos.390/2, 385/2 and 385/6 in Feroke Village, Kozhikode Taluk, Kozhikode District.

¶25

The applicants have not specifically averred in the SA as to whether they were prompt in repayment of the outstanding loan due to the defendant bank. However, it is revealed from the perusal of the written statement of the defendant that since the applicants defaulted in repayment of the outstanding loan due, the loan account came to be classified as Non-Performing Asset on 01.05.2023. Hence, Annexure – A1 demand notice dated 11.05.2023 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.

¶26

The applicants sent Annexure – A2 reply dated 05.07.2023 through their Advocate to the defendant stating that issuance of demand notice is unjustified and improper and that amount claimed in the demand notice is excessive and that there is no provision for payment of penal interest and compound interest and that demand notice did not contain any required particulars. For the aforesaid representation the defendant sent Annexure – A3 reply dated 18.07.2023 to the applicants’ Advocate. On perusal of Annexure – A3 it is seen that all the issues raised by the applicant in Annexure – A2 has been suitably replied.

¶27

Annexure – A2 representation was sent on 05.07.2023, the defendant sent Annexure – A3 reply on 18.07.2023 i.e. to say within a period of 15 days from the date of receipt of the Annexure – A2. Therefore, this Tribunal does not find any merit in the contention of

¶28

Page 2 of 5

¶29

SA No.552 of 2023

¶30

the applicants that Annexure – A3 representation was sent beyond the period of 15 days.

¶31

In Annexure – A1 demand notice, the loan amount sanctioned and the outstanding as on 11.05.2023 is clearly stated. The reason for classification of loan account as NPA is also stated as due to default in payment of the instalments/interests/principal debt. Hence, this Tribunal does not find any substance in the contention of the applicants that the Annexure – A1 demand notice does not contain any details as to the arrears and the reasons for classifying the loan account as NPA.

¶32

The applicants have contended in the SA that the defendant did not file the affidavit satisfying all the conditions of Section 14(1) of the SARFAESI Act, 2002. Annexure – A7 is the certified copy of the affidavit filed by the defendant in CMP No.1827/2023 before the Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Kozhikode. The defendant has also produced the certified copy of the same as Annexure – B7. A perusal of Annexure – A7 affidavit shows that all the details such as availment of credit facilities by the applicants upon creation of equitable mortgage over the immovable properties, default in repayment of the outstanding loan due, classification of loan account as NPA, issuance of demand notice to the applicants, the description of the secured assets, the outstanding amount as on 26.09.2023 were furnished. A perusal of Annexure – A6 order shows that the Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Kozhikode after having perused the contention of the affidavit and the documents filed in support of the affidavit and having satisfied over the same passed the order appointing Advocate Commissioner to take physical possession of the secured asset. This Tribunal does not find any infirmity or illegality in the above order.

¶33

The applicants have failed to prove their case so as to get the reliefs sought for in the SA. In view of the foregoing reasons, this Tribunal holds that the applicants are not entitled to get the reliefs sought for in this SA.

¶34

Resultantly, SA No.552 of 2023 stands dismissed. However, there shall be no order as to costs.

¶35

Dictated to Steno, taken down, transcribed, typed by him, corrected and pronounced by me in the open court on this the 17^th day of June, 2025.

¶36

(Su. WILLYAHM) PRESIDING OFFICER

¶37

Page 3 of 5

¶38

SA No.552 of 2023

¶39

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

¶40

Sl. No.	Date	Particulars
1.	11.05.2023	True copy of demand notice issued by theAdvocate Commissioner	Annexure-A1
2.	05.07.2023	True copy of the representation.	Annexure-A2
3.	18.07.2023	True copy of the reply	Annexure-A3
4.	03.08.2023	True copy of the possession notice	Annexure-A4
5.	29.09.2023	True copy of the application	Annexure-A5
6.	05.10.2023	True copy of the order in CMP No.1827 of 2023 on the file of Chief Judicial Magistrate Court,Kozhikode.	Annexure-A6
7.	29.09.2023	Certified copy ofthe affidavit.	Annexure-A7

¶41

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

¶42

Sl. No.	Date	Particulars
1.	---	True photocopy of the postal acknowledgment of Annexure-A3 by applicants’ lawyer.	Annexure-B1
2.	05.08.2023	True photocopy of the paper publication effectedin Indian Express daily.	Annexure-B2
3.	05.08.2023	True photocopy of the paper publication effectedin Mathrubhumidaily.	Annexure-B3
4.	---	True photocopy of affixture of Annexure-A3inthe secured asset.	Annexure-B4
5.	---	True photocopy of the CERSAI registration of the secured assets of the applicants.	Annexure-B5

¶43

Page 4 of 5

¶44

SA No.552 of 2023

¶45

6.	---	Certified copy of Sec.14 application filed by the defendantinCMP No.1827/2023	Annexure-B6
7.	---	Certified copy of affidavit filed by the	Annexure-B7
		defendantinCMP No.1827/2023.

¶46

(Su. WILLYAHM) PRESIDING OFFICER

¶47

Mj/

¶48

Page 5 of 5

Mammu v. versus Punjab National Bank

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mammu v. versus Punjab National 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

Anish Anakkal Balan versus Idbi Bank

Ms B S Dhatu Pvt. Ltd. Director Dilip Satynarayan Agrawal versus Indian Bank

Jyotsna Chakraborty Das versus Canara Bank

Hdfc Bank versus Aniraj Chauhan

Punjab National Bank versus M/S Poonam Industries

Icici Bank Limited versus Joginder Singh