Dismissed

B N Ramgopal v. Idbi Bank

DRT9 Jul 2025SA/72/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an application under Section 17 of the SARFAESI Act challenging steps for symbolic and physical possession, the DT held the bank meticulously followed statutory due process, including notice service and newspaper publication, thereby validating the proceeding under Section 14.

What did the court decide?

The application challenging the bank's possession proceedings was dismissed. Pending interlocutory applications were disposed of.

B N Ramgopal versus Idbi Bank — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2025)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERYTRIBUNAL - I AT HYDERABAD

¶2

DATED THIS THE gIH DAY OF JULY,2C25

¶3

PRESENT: GUMMADI GOPICHAND, PRESIDING OFFICER

¶4

sA.No.72/2c23

¶5

l.lle lur lRamgopal,

¶6

S/o late I3.C. NagappaSetty,

¶7

Aged 67 years, Occ:business

¶8

Flat No.802, Manasasarovar Heightsll, Manovikas Nagar, RTC Colony,

¶9

Secunderabd-S0O O09.

¶10

2 Smt.l].R. Nandini, W/o t).R. Ramgopal,

¶11

Aged 59 years, Occ:business,

¶12

Flat No.802, Manasasarovar Heightsll,

¶13

Manovikas Nagar, RTC Colony, Secunderabd-SOO 009

... Applicants

And

IDBI Bank Ltd.,

Rep. by its Authorized officer Mahaveer House, 1"t floor, Basheerbagh Square, Flyderabad-500 029.

¶18

.... Re.spondent

¶19

Counsel for the Applicants Sn J. SunilKumr

¶20

Counsel for tlrc Resporudent Sri TriuikramChittunt

¶21

-: QllpER.-

¶22

t. 1'his application is liled by the Applicant u/s.17 olthc SARI'AFISI Acr, #.2Q?kchallenging^{the steps initiated by the Respondentfor taking} ,#-e{i:' phy,$$$fossession of the schedute propert5r through Advocate , .'^';-. I {S {: 'li;..,..ri$h}\n. YlFi()mm ; .;i^I r pursuant nrrrerranl fn r.}.- ^-l^-- to the orders of ^f^r I-d.Principal Senior^{,.l T)-:-^:.^^r} cr^-:^-civiln:--:l ,fu' r-l':furdgi:. .- rlgt'. N{crjtfrail Matkajgiriin crl.M.[).No. | 12023 anrj ro cic<:larc thc f li 0^g JUU.ffi"',rj;#^{and void.} U *.9r d. ,Sj.Sd.# W

¶23

,2, 'l'he averments made in the application, in brief, are that:

¶24

The son of the Applicants availed educational loan from the Respondent and the Applicants stood as guarantors and created mortgage in respect of the schedule property in securiff of the said loan. Due to Covid- 19, the Applicants could not repay the loan dues as the son of the Applicants could not get employment. Without issuing any demand notice and possession notice,straightaway the Respondent is trying to take physical possession of the schedule properly which is worth more than Rs.2 crores, through advocate commissioner pursuant to the orders of Ld.PrincipalSr.Civil^Judge, Medchal and the said advocate commissioner issued^noticc dt.22.O2.2O23 to the Applicants to vacate the schedule^premises.The impugned possession notice was not^published in two^leading ncwspapers and also not affixed on the schedule^{property. Hence the} SA.

¶25

The Respondent filed their Replydenying all the^{adverse allegations} maclc in thc SA and contended that^{son of the Applicantsavailed} educationalloan from the Respondent and^{the Applicants stood as} guarantors andcreated mortgage in respect of the^{schedule property} and thereafter committed default. So,^{the loan account was classified} as NI>A an accordingly, Respondent^{issued demandnotice} ctt. 16.08.2O2land possession notice^{dt.2O.12.2O21to the Applicantsby} strictly following the procedure laid^{down under the provisions of} SARFAESI Act, 2OO2 and^{Rules made thereunderand there are no} violations. Accordingly, Respondent^{prayed to dismissthe SA.}

¶26

Ld. Counsel for the ApplicaInrts and Ld. Counsel for the \int^and perused the ma ter ial brI rought on record. Hr re Dolhts that arist: lor co) n Ssidererartion are '* li ,sr/ iii

¶27

whether the Applicants haue established anA ualid grounds for challenging the steps initiated bg the Resporudent for taking physical possession of the schedule propertg through aduocate conrmissiorter?

¶28

ii. To what relief ?

¶29

Point^jVo.(if :-

¶30

During the course of arguments, Ld. Counsel for the Applicants and Ld. Counsel for the Respondent reiterated their respective^{versions as stated} supra.

¶31

Ttrc undisputed facts of the case are that the son of the^Applicants availed educational loan from the Respondent and the^{Applicants herein} stood as guarantors and created mortgage in respect of the^schedule property to secure the said loan and thereafter,they committed default in rcpaying thc loan dues.

¶32

The specific contention of the Applicants is^that without^{servingdemand} notice and possession notice, the Respondent^{straightaway, initiated} srcps ibr Laking physical posscssion of thc schedule^{property through} advocate commissioner without following^{due process of law.}

¶33

I)er contra, Respondent contended that they have duly^{followed the} -.-,prifc.dl,r;c^{laid dow'rt under1.he provisions of SARFAESI Act., 2OO2and} -ffil,{.^$ .reunder in issuing the statutory^{notices to the Applicants} "ffir"o^{Hidtl" sreps u/s r}+.of the SARFAESI Act, 2oo2 for taking phyiical posse;$ion of the schedule property.

¶34

iu' In ordcr to substantiate their contention, the Responclent filed relevant material documents along with the Reply filed by them. As per the said documents, it is clear that the Respondent issued demand notice dt.16.08.2o2r u/s 13(2) of the SARFAESI Act, 2oo2 and the said notice was sent to the Applicants through Regd.Post. and the said notice was received by the Applicants as evidenced by the postal acknowledgements filed by the Respondent. In fact, after receipt of the said notice, the Applicants also raised objections in response to the said demand notice and the Respondent submitted l.heir reply to the said objections raisecl bt' thc Applicants vide letter clt.28. lO.2o2l and thereby complied with Sectioq 13(3A) of the SARF'AESI Act, 2OO2.. Thereafter, the Respondent issued possession notice dt.2o.12.2021 and the said notice was received by the Applicants as evidenced by the postal acknowledgements filed by the Respondent. The said possession notice was published in English and Tclugu daily newspapers as evidenced by the copies of paper publication filed by the Respondent and the said notice was also affixed on the schedule propert5r as depicted in the photographs filed by thc Respondent. Thus, the Respondent has scrupulously followed Rule 8(l )&(2) of Sccurity Intercsl. (llnforcement) Rules, 2OO2 in taking symbolic possession of the schedule property.

¶35

r0. As per the provisions of Section t4 of sARFAESI Act, 2oo2, after

¶36

issuance of possession notice u/s 13(a) of the SARFAESI Act, 2oo2, the sccured creditor is at liberty to approach the concerned District Magistrate or Chief Judicial Magistrate for taking physical possession of the secured asset. In the instant case, after issuing demand notice and possession notice to the Applicants, the Respondent approachecl I.rl.l)rirrcipalSr.Oivil Judgc, Mcdchal Malka3giriu/s l4 of the SAIiI.'AIISI ."ti:;ili,ffit,,#.m$r^{appointmentof advocatc commissionerfor taking physical} gfi€ffi.r.,.scheduleproperty.Ld.PrincipalSr.CivilJudge, ," hal-MaRa\iriarter going through the record, appointed advocatc $^I {ryM'":fild 'tlla the :he said :itt advocate comm:o::'::"^:'Tmissioner visited the schedure U propcrty ancl;$$Led notice dt.22.o2.2o23 to the Applicants for vacaring iQ o -$ "l*# 4 ,h'^

¶37

thc schedule property. So, the saicl notice issued by the advocate <:otnniissione r lor taking physical possession of the schedule property is perfectly legal and valid.

¶38

I t. So, considering all the circumstances, I am of the opinion that the lrrocccdings initiatcd by ttrc Respondent bank t>cforc thc I-d.I'>rincipalSr.civil Judge, Medchal-Malkajgiriu/s 14 of the SARFAI1sI Act, 2OO2 for taking physical possession of the schedule propert5r are quite legal and strictly in accordance with the provisions of SARFAESI Act, 2OO2 and Rules made thereunder and there are no violations. Ar--c;ordingly, this point is answcred in favour of thc Respondcnt ancl against the Applicants.

¶39

Point No.(ii):-

¶40

In thc rcsult, sA72l2023 is dismissed as therc are no mcrits.

¶41

consequently, the Interlocutory Applications, pending if any, shall stand disposcd of. Nr> ordcr as to costs.

¶42

communicate a copy of this order to the parties concerned.

¶43

,ir,4 <tl ,luiy, .)U25).

¶44

sdl - (G. coPr CHANDI PRESIDING OFFICER

¶45

I I JljL 2il?5

¶46

rrurEGog

B N Ramgopal v. Idbi Bank

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

B N Ramgopal v. Idbi 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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Union Bank of India versus Mr. Palnati Vamsi Krishna

Smt Sangavarapu Kalyani versus Karur Vysya Bank

Maspelly Vittal versus LIC Housing Finance Ltd.

D Bikshapathi versus The Sundaram Home FinanceLtd

Pasula Chandrashekar versus Union Bank of India

B Aruna versus Indian Bank