In an application under the SARFAESI Act, the applicant challenged the bank's action for taking physical possession due to alleged non-service of notices and invalid executive order involving the Superintendent of Police. The Tribunal held the action illegal and quashed it.
SARFAESI action against applicants is set aside with costs.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
SA 99 of 2025 U)
DRT.PATNA
DEBTSRECOVERYTRIBUNALPATNA
PresidingOfficer:Shri Kaushalendra Yadav
SA-99of 2025
Present:
For the Applicant : Sh.SatishNr. Sinha,Advocate For the Respondent Bank : Ms.Tanushri,Advocate
Dated: 24.07.2025
JUDGMENT
2
SA 99 of 2025 [J)
DRT, PATNA
applicant no.2 mortgaged his property with the Bank, The applicant no. 3 stood as guarantor to the loan in question. Due to default in repayment of dues of the Bank, the account was classified as NPA on 03.06.2024. In order to recover outstanding dues the respondent Bank initiated SARFAESI Action against the borrower by issuing Demand Notice dated 30.07.2024 U/S 13(2) of the act calling upon the borrowers to make the payment of Rs.20,13,540.77. Thereafter, the respondent took symbolic possession of the property on 24.10.2024 by issuing Possession Notice u/s 13(4) of the SARFAESI Act. Further, the respondent bank moved before District Administration to assist towards physical possession of the property U/S 14 of the Act. Accordingly, the District Administration fixed the date as 26.03.2025 for physical possession of the property. Aggrieved from the action of physical possession, present SA has been filed by the applicant.
"/~ ,.7 _,,'.'\ f~ -Y'
3
DRT,PATNA
SA 99 of 2025 U)
demand notice, the applicant failed to repay dues of the Bank. Hence, the respondent Bank proceeded further and took symbolic possession of the property on 24.10.2024. The possession notice was dispatched to the applicants on 29.10.2024 and a copy of the same was also pasted on secured asset. Further, the possession notice was published in 'Morning India' and 'Sunmarg' on 29.10.2024. Thereafter, the respondent Bank moved before District Magistrate U/S 14 of the Act. Accordingly, the District Magistrate affixing his signature passed an order dated 07.03.2025 scheduling on 26.03.2025 for physical possession of the property. The property has also been registered with CERSAI. The applicants also failed to comply with the order dated 27.03.2025 passed by this Tribunal..
."7.
?
4
ORT. PATNA
SA 99 of 2025 IJ]
ORDER
The application SA 99 of 2025, is allowed. Sarfaesi Action under challenge against the applicants, is hereby set aside with costs. The respondent will also not be entitled for the expenses and the recovery or any other charges for the Action under challenge.
[KaushalendraYadav] Presiding Officer
Debts Recovery Tribunal, Patna
Judgment signed, sealed, dated and pronounced in the open court ~.c~~ TH ~ ~ 24 Day of July, 2025. \ Y'> Y'>
~ \ Y'> Y'> ~
;V"'\ 1
[KaushalendraYadav]
Presiding Officer
Debts Recovery Tribunal, Patna
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the SARFAESI action is valid where the demand and possession notices were not properly served and the disposal certificate was signed by the Superintendent of Police.
Whether the Zone Officer under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act has the jurisdiction to sign an order jointly with the Superintendent of Police.
How to adjudicate the present application for quashing of SARFAESI action taken by the Bank.
3 provisions across 1 enactments
Ranjan Kumar Singh
Mithilesh Singh
Babita Devi
Ujjivan Small Finance Bank
Kaushalendra Yadav
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
