Dismissed

Amit Bajaj and another v. Smfg India Home Finance Co. Ltd.

DRT18 Sept 2025SA/95/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Tribunal examined a challenge to the enforcement proceedings initiated by a secured creditor to take physical possession of mortgaged properties via an advocate commissioner. The Applicants contested the validity of the demand and possession notices. The tribunal found the statutory requirements were met.

What did the court decide?

The Special Application filed by the Applicants was dismissed with no order as to costs.

Amit Bajaj and another versus Smfg India Home Finance Co. Ltd. — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2025)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERYTRIBUNAL^{- I AT HYDERABAD}

¶2

DATEDTHISTHE 18TH DAYOFSEPTEMBER,²⁰²⁵

¶3

PRESENT: GUMMADI GOPICHAND,^{PRESIDING OFFICER}

¶4

sA.No.95,/2024

¶5

Amit Bajaj, S/o Rama kishore Bajaj, Aged 44 years, Occ:busienss

¶6

Smt. Sunita Bajaj,

¶7

W/ o Amit Bajaj,Occ:business Both R/o H.No.5-9-30/^1/31, F.No.2 1, Sriniketan^APTS Road No.2, Hyderabadf-SOo 063.

¶8

... Applicants

¶9

And

¶10

SMFG India Home Finance^Co.Ltd., (Erstwhile Fullerton India Home Finance Company Ltd.) Rep. by its Authorized officer, Brij Tarang, 4s floor, D.No.6-3- 1 192 / l-6, Kundhanbagh, Begumpet, Hyderabad-SoO^016.

¶11

... Respondent

¶12

Counsel for ttte APPlicants Counsel for the ResPondent

¶13

Sri D.Raglnuulu Sri Lanka Jagannadham

¶14

-:ORDER:

¶15

This application is^{filedbY the} Applicants v,ls.l7 of the^{SARPAESI Act,} 2002, challenging the^stePs initiated by the Respondent^{for taking} physical possession of the schedule^properties through^Advocate commissioner Pursuant^to the orders of Ld.CJM,^Khammamin Cr1.M.P.No.33/23 gld to:{Sclare^{the same as illegal and void'}

¶16

The ,^{in brief, are that:}

¶17

Applicants availed housing^{loan of Rs.2,50,00,000/-in the year2Ol7} from the Respondent^{and created mortgagein respect of the schedule} properties to secure the said loan.^{Due to covid- 19 and financial} problems, the Applicants could not^{pay some instalments'Without} servinganynoticeontheApplicants,theRespondentinitiated proceedings for taking^{physical possessionof the schedule properties} through advocate commissioner^{undersection14 of the SARFAESI Act,} 2OO2 by filing Crl.M'P'No.33/23^{on the file of Ld'CJM, Khammamand} the advocate commissioner^{appointed by the Ld.CJM,Khammam} issued notice dt.21.O2.2O24^{to the Applicants tovacate the schedule} premises. Demand notice and^{possessionnotice are not servedon the} Applicantsandtheimpugnedpossessionnoticewasnotpublishedin newspapers and also not^{affixed on the scheduleproperties and so, the} said proceedings are^{illegal and arbitrary.Hence the SA'}

¶18

The Respondent filed^{counterin the stay petition and adoptedthe same} as Reply in SA and contended^{that the Applicantswho are husband and} wife, availed home loan from^{the Respondentby creating mortgagein} respect of the schedule^{properties' Thereafter, the Applicants} committed default in^{repaying the loan dues. So, the loan account was} classified as NPA and the^{Respondent issued demandnotice} dt.15.12.2022u/s^{13(2) of the SARFAESI Act,2OO2 and the said notice was} published in two daily newspapers.^{Thereafter,the Respondent issued} possession notice dt. 13.04.2023 and sent^{the said notice to the} Applicants through Regd' Post and^{the same was affixedon the} schedule^properties and the^{said noticewas also published in two} Ieading newspapers on^{15.04.2023. Thereafter, the Respondent} initiated proceedings before the^{Id.CJM, Khammamfor taking physical} schedule properties u/s^{14 of} the^{SARFAESI Act,} :,' 1. : So.iri'dre hri no.. merits in the^{SA and accordingly,Respondent}

¶19

*
sfP

¶20

Heard Ld. Counsel for the Applicants and Ld. Counsel for the Respondent and perused the material brought on record.

¶21

Now the points that arise for consideration are

¶22

i. whetler tte Applicants haue established any ualid^grounds for clwllenging tle steps initiated bg tlve Respondent for taking^phgsical possession of the sch.edule properties through aduocate ammissioner?

¶23

ii. To what relief?

¶24

Point JVo.(if :-

¶25

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

¶26

There is no dispute regarding the fact that the Applicants^availedloan from the Respondent and created mortgage in respect of the schedule properties and thereafter, the Applicants committed default in repaying .the loan dues.

¶27

The specific contention of the Applicants is that without serving^demand notice and possession notice to the Applicants and without complying^with Rule 8(1)&(2) of Security Interest^{(Enforcement)} Rules 2002,^the Respondent straightaway, initiated proceedings for taking^physical possession Fchedule^{properties through advocatecommissioner u/ s} 14 of-tlre SARFA 2OO2 and so, the said proceedings are not legal ' :,: :": and'valid. .,' .;,'^:'t;. ,.. .!.,' * 18JEPM 9. tra, Respondent tended that they have duly followed the the provisions of SARFAESI Act,2OO2 and

¶28

¶29

Rules made thereunder in issuing all the statutory notices to the Applicants and also in initiating steps for taking physical possession of the schedule property /s 14 ofthe SARFAESI Act,2OO2.

¶30

In order to substantiate their contention, the Respondent enclosed relevant material documents along with the counter filed by them. As per the said material documents, it is clear that the Respondent issued demand notice dt.15.12.2o22 u/s 13(2) of the SARFAESI Act, 2OO2 and sent the said (? notice to the Applicants through Regd. Post and the said notice was returned unserved as evidenced by the postal covers filed by the Respondent and so, the Respondent published the said notice in two daily newspapers. Thus there is valid service of demand notice on the Applicants. When the Applicants failed to comply with the said demand notice, the Respondent issued possession notice dt.15.O4.2023 u/s 13(a) of tlre Aci, 2OO2 and the said notice was sent to the Applicants through Regd. Post and the said notice was received by the Applicants as evidenced ,:l by the postal acknowledgements filed by the Respondent. The Applicants also filed the copy of the said possession notice along with the SA filed by them. The said possession notice was published in two daily newspapers as evidenced by the copies of paper publication filed by the Respondent and the said notice was also affixed on the schedule properties as depicted in the copy of photographs filed by the Respondent. Thus the Respondent have duly followed Rule 8(1)(2) of Security Interest (Enforcement) Rules, 2OO2 in issuing possession notice to the Applicants.

¶31

As per the provisions of Section 14 of SARFAESI Act, 2002, after issuance of possession notice u/s 13(4) of the SARFAESI Act,2OO2, the secured ":1:r--< creditor is at liberty togpproach the concerned District Magistrate or Chief t.t . ':: l' Judicid-MAgistr.ate' fo,.1..!((ing physical possession of the secured asset. I-ni'tho^jnstant cdse, aft demand notice and possession notice to nt being secured creditor, approached Ld. e SARFAESI Act,2OO2 for appointment of icai possession of the schedule

¶32

properties. Ld. CJM, Khammam after going through the record, appointed advocate commissioner and the said advocate commissioner visited the schedule properties and issued notice dt.21.02.2024 to the Applicants for vacating the schedule properties. The Applicants liled copy of the said notice along with the SA filed by them. So, the said notice dt.21.O2.2024 issued by the advocate commissioner for taking physical possession of the schedule properties is perfectly legal and valid.

¶33

So, considering all the circumstances, I am of the opinion that the proceedings initiated by the Respondent on the file of the Ld. CJM, Khammam u/s 14 of the SARFAESI Act, 2OO2 for taking^physical possession ofthe schedule property are quite legal and ialid and strictly in accordance with the provisions of SARFAESI Act,2OO2 and Rules made thereunder and there are no violations. So, I see no^ground warranting interference of this Tribunal with the steps initiated by the Respondent for taking physical possession of the schedule^properties u/s 14 of the tz. SARFAESI Act,2OO2. Accordingly, this^point is answered in favour of^the Respondent and against the Applicants.

¶34

Potnt No.(ll)t

¶35