The Tribunal rejected an interim application filed by a property purchaser seeking a stay against the bank's possession proceedings under SARFAESI Act, ruling that the property was already mortgaged prior to the purchase.
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.
Before Harish Kumar Kaushik, I/c Presiding Officer DRT-III, Mumbai At: DRT-II Mumbai
I.A. No. 1217 of 2026 In Securitisation Application No. 103 of 2026
Sr. No.7 Decided on : 08.04.2026
Valens Consultancy Services Pvt Ltd.
...APPLICANT/s
V/s.
Punjab National Bank & Ors.
...RESPONDENT/s
Argued By –
Mr Abhishek Sawant, Advocate for the Applicant. Mr Vibin Naik, Advocate for Respondent No. 1. None for other Respondents.
O R D E R
1874.95 sq. mtrs., Gaurav Excellency. (for short “the said property”) schedule on 09.04.2026.
Page 2 of 3
Tejas
purchasing of the said property. The Respondent Bank is proceeding to take possession as per provisions of SARFAESI Act, 2002 due to failure on the part of the borrower to repay the loan amount.
Sd/(HARISH KUMAR KAUSHIK) I/c PRESIDING OFFICER DRT-III, MUMBAI At: DRT-II, Mumbai
Page 3 of 3
3 issues framed by the court
Whether an interim stay should be granted to prevent the bank from taking physical possession of a mortgaged property.
Whether the applicant's lack of due diligence at the time of purchase of a mortgaged property affects the bank's right to recover.
Whether a prima facie case exists in favour of the applicant for balancing of convenience.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Valens Consultancy Services Pvt Ltd.
Punjab National Bank
HARISH KUMAR KAUSHIK
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
