The Tribunal disposed of a Securitization Application seeking to set aside Securitization measures under the SARFAESI Act. The court held the application infructuous because the auction failed due to lack of bidders and prior similar proceedings were already dismissed.
Securitization Application dismissed as infructuous.
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.
IN THE DEBTS RECOVERYTRIBUNAL_ II AT HYDERABAD
DATED THIS THE27TH DAY OF AUGUST,2026
PRESENT: SH. RAMESHWARKOTHE,B.Com, L.LB. (Hons.), M.A. PRESIDING OFFICER
Securitization ApplicationNo. 259 OF 2024
Versus
Canara Bank, Kurnool Branch Represented by its Authorised Officer Bhagirathi Complex, Park Road, Kurnool, A.P.
.....ResPondent
Counsel for the Applicants : Mr. V. Sethu Madhava Rao Counsel for Respondent : Mr. A.V.S.S. Prasad
-:ORDER:-
Page 2 of 6
SA No.259/2024
under section 13(4) and 14 of the Act, including the action of taking physical possession of the SA Schedule properties via vacation notice dated 31.05.2024 in Crl.M.P.No.125 of 2025 on the file of Chief Judicial Magistrate cum Principal Senior Civil Judge, Kurnool and sale notice dated 02.05.2024, fixing the auction on 21.06.2024 under Rule 8(6) of the Security Interest (Enforcement) Rules, 2002 (hereinafter "Rules" for short).
Page 3 of 6
sA No. 259/2024
offered as security and that no security interest within the meaning of section 2(zf) of the SARFAESI Act was created over the said properties, as the original Gift Deed was never deposited with the intention of creating a mortgage by deposit of title deeds under section 5B(f) of the Transfer of properties Act. Rerying upon Mathew Varghese v. Amritha Kumar, Sri Sai Annadatha v. Canara Bank and Amarender Reddy v. canara Bank, the Applicants contend that the impugned measures are illegal and seek, inter alia, setting aside of the sale notice, auction and section 14 proceedings, a decraration that Item No.3 is not a secured asset, and consequential reliefs.
Page 4 of 6
SA No. 25912024
subsequent SaleNoticedated 02.05.2024 fixing the e-auction on 21.06.2024 did notfructify for want of bidders and that, meanwhile, proceedings under Section t4 ofthe SARFAESI Act were initiatedin crl.M.P. No. t25/2024before the competent Magistrate, pursuantto which an AdvocateCommissionerwas appointed and possessionof the securedproperties was taken under the warrantdated 2L.05.2024. TheRespondentfurtheralleges that the Applicantshad disposed ofhypothecated machinerywithout the Bank's knowledge, necessitating the Section14 proceedings. Hence,respondent prays for dismissal of theSA.
Page 5 of 5
SA No.25912024
Point No.(i):
B. Thepresent Securitisation Application is the second application instituted by the applicants; the earlier SA.No,613 of 2017 was considered by this Tribunal and dismissed insofar as the relief sought thereunder, On perusal of the records of the prior proceedings, this Tribunal has examined the material documents and earlier held that the Demand Notice issued under Section 13(2) and the Possession Notice issued under Section 13(4) of the SARFAESI Act, 2002, and were in conformity with the statutory prescriptions. Other mater related to question of respondent having proper security interest or not was also dealt in the previous SA. Having regard to those prior adjudications, the applicants are not entitled to re-open the same controversy in the present proceedings on grounds which have already been raised and finally dealt with by this Tribunal. The plea advanced by the applicants insofar as it seeks to relitigate matters which were concluded in the earlier S.A.s is therefore unsustainable and is rejected.
i I I ,lIt 'l I I
page 6 of G
SA No. zsglz0z4
Point No.(ii):
t2. No order as to costs.
(Typed-,to my dictation by the steno., corrected, signed ond pronounced by me in the open court on this the Zfh doy of August, 2026).
/7W"tL$t\ (R:*wESnWAR KOTHE) PRESIDING OFFICER
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the applicants made out any valid ground for quashing the sale notice dated 02.05.2024 by fixing the auction on 21.06.2024?
Prayer for appropriate relief.
3 provisions across 2 enactments
K.V. Sudhakar Reddy and Ors.
Canara Bank
Rameshwarah
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
