Dismissed

Kovuri Nagesh Kumar v. Icici Bank Limited

DRT20 Jul 2026SA/116/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal dismissed the applicant's application filed under Section 17 of the SARFAESI Act challenging the bank's possession proceedings. The Tribunal held that the bank followed all requisite procedures, including serving demand and possession notices and publishing notices in newspapers, thus rejecting the applicant's plea of illegality.

What did the court decide?

Application dismissed as there are no merits; no interference with the bank's possession proceedings.

Kovuri Nagesh Kumar versus Icici Bank Limited — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2026)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERYTRIBUNAL - 1 AT HYDERABAD

¶2

DATED THIS THE 2OTH DAY OF JULY, 2026

¶3

PRESENT: SRI GUMMADI GOPICHAND, PRESIDING OFFICER

¶4

SA.No.116,/2026

¶5

Kovuri Nagesh Kumar, S/o Saidulu, aged 39 years, Occ:business, R/o H.No.4- 1 1-360/3 1, Chaitanypauri, Nalgonda-50800 i.

¶6

. . . Applicant

¶7

Versus

¶8

ICICI BanK Ltd. Rep. by its Authorized officer Ground & first floor, Beat Market, 6-5-2 I &,6- 5-22, Hyderabad Road, Nalgonda-SO8oO1 .

¶9

... Respondent

¶10

Counsel for the Applicants : Ms.K. Swetha Counsel for Respondent : Si G.Adian Kiran Raj

¶11

Reserued on :08.07.2026 Pronounced on : 2O.O7.2O26 Uploaded on : 2O.O7.2O26

¶12

ORDER

¶13

This application is filed by the Applicant u/s. 17 of the SARFAESI Act, 2OO2, challenging the proceedings initiated by the Respondent for taking physical possession o schedule property through Advocate commissioner of Ld.CJM, Nalgonda in Crl.M.P.No. 169/2 ".r"ff as illegal and void. 2. The averments in the 2. 1 application, s11y t117s iqffief, "ii are that: Applicant herein Bu of Rs.3O lakhs from the Respondent Bank st the mortgage of schedule

¶14

property and the Applicant was regularly^paying the^instalments. However, due to loss in the business,^{the Applicant could not paysome} instalments. The Applicant requested^{the bank to regularizethe loan} account by receiving the overdue^{amount. But without consideringthe} same, the Bank declared the^{loan accountas NPA. Without serving} demand notice and^{possessionnotice to the Applicant, the Respondent} straightway^proceeded for taking^{physical possession of schedule} property pursuant to the orders of Ld'CJM,^{Nalgondaand the advocate} commissioner visited the^{schedule property and affixed a notice} demanding the Applicant to^{hand over the physical possessionof the} schedule property which is illegal^{and arbitrary and so, the said} proceedings are not legal and valid. The impugned^{possession notice} was not published in two daily newspapers^{and also not affixed on the} schedule property as contemplated u/r^{8(1)&(2) of Security Interest} (Enforcement) Rules, 2002. Hence^{the SA.}

¶15

¶16

The Respondent filed their Reply^{denying all the adverseallegations} made in the SA and contended^{that after availing loan from the Bank,} the Applicant committed default in^{repayment of loan dues. So, the} Respondent classified the^{loan accountof the Applicant as NPA in} accord.ance with the^guidelinesof RBI^{and issued demand notice and} possession notice and the said notices were served^{on the Applicants.} The said possession notice^{wasaffixed on the scheduleproperlvand} also published in two daily^{newspapers. Thereafter, the Respondent} proceeded u/s 14 of the Act, 2OO2 ar,.d obtained^{orders from the} Ld. nda for appointment of advocate commissioner^{for taking} lon^{of the schedule property and the said advocate} notice to the Applicant to^vacate the^schedule ere are no violations. Accordingly,^Respondent SA.

¶17

Heard Ld. Counsel for the Applicant and Ld.Counsei for the

¶18

Respondent. Perused the material brought on record.

¶19

Now the points that arise for consideration are

¶20

i. tuhether the Applicant has established ang ualid grounds for challenging the proceedings initiated bg the Respondent for taking phgsical possession of the schedule propertg u/s 14 oftlrc SARFAESI Act, 2002 through aduocate ammissioner?

¶21

ii. To uthat relief?

¶22

Point No.lil:-

¶23

During the course of arguments, Ld. Counsel for the Applicant and Ld. Counsel for the Respondent reiterated their respective versions as stated supra.

¶24

7 . The undisputed facts of the case are that the Applicant availed loan from the Bank and created mortgage against the schedule property and thereafter, committed default in repaying the loan dues and so, the Respondent initiated proceedings under the provisions of SARFAESI Act, 2OO2 for taking physical possession of the schedule property.

¶25

The specific contention of the Applicant is that the Respondent without serving demand,n@t€€1r{go ssession notice and without following Rule 8(1)&(2) of way, initiated proceedings for taking physical on f the edule property through advocate comml ner,r u/s 14 of the SAF AESI Act, 2OO2 and so, the said .t"il4lll[m nJ; fu,mdf,

¶26

Per contra, Respondent^{contendedthat Applicant admittedlycommitted} default in repaying^{the loan dues and so, the loan account was classified} as NPA as^per the^{guidelinesof RBI and the Respondent issueddemand} notice and^{possession notice to the Applicant by duly followingthe} procedure contemplated^{under the provisions of sARFAESIAct, 2002 and} Rules made thereunder^{and thereafter,initiatedproceedingsu/s 14 of the} SARFAESI Act,^{2OO2 for taking physicalpossession of the schedule} property by following due^{process of law.}

¶27

To substantiate^{their contention,the Respondentfi1ed material documents} alongwiththeReplyfiledbythem.Asperthesaiddocuments,itisclear that the Respondent^{issued demand notice dt.21.o9.2023u/s 13(2)of the} SARAFAESI Act, 2oo2^{and Sentthe said notice to the Applicant through} Regd.Postasevidencedbythepostaltrackreportslrledbythe Respondent.ThoughtheApplicantcontendedthattheBankfaiiedtogive reply to the objections^{raised by him in response to the demandnotice, not} filed any material documents^{to prove that he raised objectionsto the} demand notice dt.21.0g.2023^{and so, the said contention is not tenable.} WhentheApplicantfailedtocomplywiththesaiddemandnotice, Respondentissuedpossessionnoticedt.|I.o3.2o24uls13(4)oftheAct, 2OO2 and. the said^{possession notice was sent to the Applicant through} Regd.post as evidenced^{by the postal acknowledgementsfiled by the} Respondent. The said^{notice waspublishedin Telugu and English daily} newspapers^AS the copies of^{paperpublication filed by the} otice was also affixed^{on the schedule property} Respon d 'opie otograph frled by the^{Respondent.Thus, the} duly Rule 8(1)&(2) of Security^Interest uing possession^{notice in respectthe}

¶28

As 14 of SARFAESI Act,2002,^{after issuance} of of the SARFAESI^{Act, 2OO2, t}le secured}

¶29

¶30

creditor is at liberty to approach the concerned District Magistrate or Chief Judicial Magistrate for taking physical possession of the secured assets. In the instant case, after issuing demand notice and possession notice to the Applicant, the Respondent being secured creditor, approached Ld.cJM, Nalgonda u/s t4 of the SARFAESI Act, 2oo2 by filing Crl.M.P.No.169l25 for appointment of advocate commissioner for taking physical possession of the schedule property. Ld.cJM, Nalgonda after considering the material on record, appointed advocate commissioner for taking physical possession of the schedule property and the said advocate commissioner issued notice to the Applicant to vacate the, schedule property and the said notice was admittedly served on the Applicant: So, the said proceedings are perfectly legal and valid.

¶31

So, considering all the circumstances, I am of the opinion that the Applicant is not entitled to any relief as there are no merits in the SA. So, I see no ground warranting interference of this Tribunal with the proceedings initiated by the Respondent for taking physical possession of the schedule properW :uls 14 of the SARFAESI Act,20O2. Accordingly, this point is answered in favour of the Respondent and against the Applicant.

¶32

Point No.(ii):-

¶33

In the result, sA lL6l26 is dismissed as there are no merits.

¶34

tory Applications, pending if any, shall stand

¶35

Communicate a copy of this order to^{the partiesconcerned.}

¶36

(Dictated to the P.S, transcibed bg her, conected, signed^{and pronounced by me in the open} court on this the 201t' daA of Julg, 2O26)

¶37

sd/(G. GOPICHANDI PR"ESIDING OFFICER

¶38

21J&?m

¶39

Arsl.
0d,1,?'ivi?nnnrn

¶40

Kovuri Nagesh Kumar v. Icici Bank Limited

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kovuri Nagesh Kumar v. Icici Bank Limited

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

Indian Bank versus Mr. Sarvasetty Suresh

Hdfc Bank Limited versus Sheshu Sarikonda

Canara Bank versus M/S. Vinayaka Textiles

Icici Bank Limited versus M/S. Madhava Indane

Thumolla Radhakishan versus Omprakash Deora People Cooperative Bank

State Bank of India versus Mr. Peddapaka Ramesh