Disposed

M Mani v. Karur Vysya Bank

DRT10 Aug 2026SA/188/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal disposed of a Securitization Application challenging a sale notice. The applicant had cleared the specific mortgage loan but remained liable for other loans, justifying the bank's retention of title deeds under general lien. Since the auction notice lapsed, the proceedings became infructuous.

What did the court decide?

Proceedings disposed as infructuous. Interim order vacated. Liberty given to applicant to approach the bank to settle remaining liability for release of title deeds.

M Mani versus Karur Vysya Bank — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2026)

SA No.188/2022

10.08.2026

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHENNAI

¶5

Dated this the 10^th day of August, 2026

¶6

Present: SMT. S.V. GOWRAMMA Presiding Officer

¶7

SARFAESI APPLICATION No. 188 of 2024

¶8

Mr.M.Mani, S/o Mr.Masilamani, No.15/3, Ramani Nagar Extn, 3rd Cross Street, Krishna Nagar, West Tambaram, Chennai -600 045. ….Applicant -Vs-

¶9

The Authorized Officer, Karur Vysya Bank Ltd, Tambaram Divisional Office, 7/73, First Floor, SBA Complex, Venkatesa Choudry Street, West Tambaram, Chennai -600 045. ….Respondent

¶10

Counsels on record / appeared:

¶11

Counsel for Applicant : M/s. S. Jayaraj Perumal Counsel for respondent : M/s. A. Arun Babu, M. Devi

¶12

ORDER ON SA 188/2024

¶13

The present Securitization Application [SA] is filed on 01.04.2024 under sub section [1] of S.17 of the Securitization And Reconstruction of Financial Asset and Enforcement of Security Interest Act,2002 (for short the ‘Act’) challenging the action and the measure taken by the secured creditor under the Security Interest Enforcement Rules, 2002 [for short the Rules].

¶14

The applicant has challenged the Sale held on 06.04.2024 pursuant to E-Auction Sale Notice dated 22.02.2024 and the outstanding amount due as per Sale Notice is Rs.10,37,175.56/-

¶15

Uploaded on 10.08.2026 at 5.05 PM

SA No.188/2022

10.08.2026

The applicant is the borrower who has filed the present SA challenging the Sale Notice dated 22.02.2024 fixing the sale on 06.04.2024. It is the case of the applicant that he had availed an Overdraft (OD) facility in the year 2017 for business purpose to the tune of Rs.42 Lakhs. Though the account was regularly serviced due to some fluctuations in repayment, the account was classified as NPA on 03.08.2023.

¶20

3.1 Though the applicant made sincere efforts to redeem the debt and made certain payments towards the loan account, the respondent bank proceeded to issue the Sale Notice dated 22.02.2024 in respect of the applicant’s residential property, fixing the reserve price at Rs.1.23 Crores, whereas the outstanding debt as in the sale notice is Rs.10,37,175.56p.

¶21

3.2 The Tribunal, vide order dated 04.04.2024, granted an interim stay of the Sale Notice, subject to the condition that the applicant deposit 10% of the entire amount due as reflected in the Sale Notice on or before 11.00 a.m. on 05.04.2024, and further deposit an equal amount within 30 days thereafter.

¶22

3.3 It is seen that the respondent bank has filed its counter along with the typed set of documents, and the case was posted for arguments on 04.03.2025. However, it is seen from the proceedings dated 21.01.2026 that the applicant submitted that the loan account is settled and the respondent bank is not returning the title deeds. Hence, the respondent bank was directed to obtain instructions and submit the same. The

¶23

Uploaded on 10.08.2026 at 5.05 PM

SA No.188/2022

10.08.2026

respondent bank, vide proceedings dated 11.02.2026, submitted that the sale did not materialize and the prayer in the SA has become infructuous.

¶28

3.4 The respondent bank also filed a memo submitting that the applicant herein had availed the credit facilities from the respondent Bank, aggregating to a total sum of Rs.61,00,000/-: (a) Mortgage Loan Facility of Rs.42,00,000/- vide sanction dated 19.06.2017, (b) Machinery Loan Facility-I of Rs.8,00,000/- vide sanction dated 22.02.2022, (c) Machinery Loan Facility-II of Rs.9,00,000/- vide sanction dated 22.02.2022, and (d) Open Cash Credit Facility of Rs.2,00,000/- vide sanction dated 22.02.2022.

¶29

3.5 On account of the default committed by the applicant in the repayment of the principal and interest under the aforesaid credit facilities, all the above loan accounts of the applicant were classified as NPA on 03.08.2023.

¶30

3.6 It is seen from para.6 of the memo that the applicant has cleared the loans liability and discharged his liability to the respondent only in respect of the Mortgage Loan facility of Rs.42 Lakhs, which is the subject matter of the e-auction sale notice dated 22.02.2024.

¶31

3.7 however, the applicant herein is still due and liable to pay a total sum of Rs.17,85,333.18, made up of a) Rs.6,69,446.08/- on account of Machinery Loan Facility-I dated 22.02.2022, b) Rs.8,17,986.86/- on account of Machinery Loan Facility-II dated 22.02.2022 and C) Rs.2,97,900.24 on account of OCC facility dated 22.02.2022. As the respondent bank has a general lien over the property as per Section 17(1)

¶32

Uploaded on 10.08.2026 at 5.05 PM

SA No.188/2022

10.08.2026

of the Indian Contract Act, 1872, and therefore, the title deeds have not been released.

¶37

3.8 The Ld. Counsel for the applicant opposed the submission of the respondent, contending that the other two loans are covered under the CGTMSE Scheme and the bank has already received the subsidy and bank are not intimating the applicant about the outstanding amount to clear for release of the title deeds.

¶38

3.9 On perusal of the case papers, it is seen that the applicant has challenged the Sale Notice dated 22.02.2024 and has also obtained an interim order. It is an admitted fact that, though the applicant has cleared the Mortgage Loan Facility, the applicant is due to claim towards the loan amount of Rs.6,69,446.08/- under the Machinery Loan Facility-I dated 22.02.2022, amount of Rs.8,17,986.86/- under the Machinery Loan Facility-II dated 22.02.2022 and an amount of Rs.2,97,900.24 under the OCC facility dated 22.02.2022. Hence, the bank has not released the title deeds and has retained the same as per the general lien.

¶39

3.10 The issue for consideration is that the sale notice which was challenged did not materialized, and the prayer in the SA has become infructuous and recording submissions of both the Ld. Counsels, the applicant is given liberty to approach the bank to settle the entire liability pertaining to the other two loan accounts for the release of the title deeds, in accordance with law.

¶40

Uploaded on 10.08.2026 at 5.05 PM

SA No.188/2022

10.08.2026

3.11 For the foregoing reasons, the present SA is only to be disposed of. Accordingly, SA stands disposed as infructuous. The memo filed by the respondent is taken on record. Interim Order granted, if any stands vacated, pending IAs are disposed of in terms of this final order. No order as to cost.

¶45

Sd/- (S.V. GOWRAMMA) PRESIDING OFFICER, DRT-III, CHENNAI

¶46

( Dictated to Steno (Suriya), transcribed by him, corrected, signed and pronounced by me on this the 10^th day of August, 2026)

¶47

ANNEXURES

¶48

LIST OF DOCUMENTS PRODUCED BY THE APPLICANT

¶49

Sl. No.	Description of Documents	Documents No.
1.	Overdraft Sanction Letter dated 19.06.2017.	A-1
2.	Statement of Account dated 14.03.2024.	A-2
3.	Possession Notice Sec.13(4) dated 31.01.2024.	A-3
4.	Impugned Sale Notice dated 22.02.2024.	A-4

¶50

LIST OF DOCUMENTS PRODUCED BY THE RESPONDNET

¶51

Sl.	Description of Documents	Documents
No.		No.
1.	Demand Notice dated 16.11.2023.	R-1
2.	Demand Notice-Acknowledgement Cards.	R-2
3.	Possession Notice dated 31.01.2024.	R-3
4.	Possession Notice-Postal Tracking receipts.	R-4
5.	Possession Notice affixture photos.	R-5
6.	Possession Notice paper publication (English- New Business Standard) dated 02.02.2024.	R-6
7.	Possession Notice paper publication (Tamil- Hindu) dated 02.02.2024.	R-7
8.	Sale Notice dated 22.02.2024.	R-8
9.	Sale Notice-Acknowledgement Cards.	R-9
10.	Sale Notice Paper publication-English-New Indian Express dated 01.03.2024.	R-10
11.	Sale Notice paper publication Tamil-Dhinamani dated 01.03.2024.	R-11
12.	Valuation report.	R-12

¶52

Uploaded on 10.08.2026 at 5.05 PM

SA No.188/2022

10.08.2026

SCHEDULE

All that part and parcel of Residential Land an extent of 1961 Sq.ft., and building there on an extent of 1107 sq.ft., in Ground Floor, 1107 Sq.ft., in first floor and 615 sq.ft., in Second Floor (PPA No.30891/64/08-09, LR No.261/2008 dated 06.08.2008) comprised in S.F. No.6/3, 6/4, 6/3A1A1, Plot No.4, Sri Sakthi Nagar Extension, Peerkankaranai Village, Tambaram Taluk, Kancheepuram District, Registration District of Chennai South and within sub Registration District of Tambaram and bounded on the following four boundaries.

¶58

North by : Irumbuliyur Village, South by : Plot No.5, East by : SF No.6/5A, West by : 16 feet road and plot. Sd/-

¶59

(S.V. GOWRAMMA) PRESIDING OFFICER, DRT-III, CHENNAI

¶60

Uploaded on 10.08.2026 at 5.05 PM

M Mani v. Karur Vysya Bank

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M Mani v. Karur Vysya 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

Similar cases

Indian Bank versus Sri Lakshmi Water Supply

Federal Bank versus udayakathiravan

Axis Bank versus M/S. Arihant Retail Private Limited

K Malarkodi versus State Bank of India

Kannan versus Union Bank of India

Varalakshmi versus Indian Bank