Dismissed

Mr SaiKrishnan v. Icici Bank Limited

DRT5 May 2026SA/274/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

An applicant challenging an auction sale under SARFAESI contended the sale deed executed in favor of the borrower was fraudulent. The tribunal held the applicant, now having registered the sale in favor of the debtor/borrower, had no right to interdict the auction.

What did the court decide?

Application for interim stay of the auction sale notice dated 16.04.2026 was dismissed allowing the auction to proceed as scheduled.

Mr SaiKrishnan versus Icici Bank Limited — Execution and Attachment | DRT (2026)

¶1

IA No.883/2026 In SA No.274/2026

¶2

05.05.2026

¶3

¶4

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHENNAI

¶5

Dated this the 05^th day of May, 2026

¶6

Present: SMT. S.V. GOWRAMMA Presiding Officer

¶7

IA No. 883 of 2026

¶8

¶9

SA No. 274 of 2026

¶10

B.Saikrishnan No.5/3, Kambar Street, Ullagaram, Madipakkam, Chennai-600 052.

¶11

^rd party

¶12

-Vs-

¶13

ICICI Bank Ltd, Rep. by its Authorised Officer No.24, South Phase, Arihant Tower, Ambattur Industrial Estate

¶14

Block No.1, Ambattur, Chennai-600 058.

¶15

M.Sathish Kumar S/o Madasamy, No.48, Eagavalliamman Kovil Street

¶16

Thiruvottriyur, Chennai- 600 019.

¶17

…Respondents

¶18

Counsels on record / appeared:

¶19

Counsel for Applicant : M/s. A.Chandrasekaran & M/s.Mahalakhsmi

¶20

ORDER ON IA 883/2026 In SA No.274/2026

¶21

The present Securitization Application [SA] is filed 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

¶22

Uploaded in E-Drt on 05.05.2026 at 02:36 P.M

¶23

IA No.883/2026 In SA No.274/2026

¶24

¶25

05.05.2026

¶26

the action and the measure taken by the secured creditor under the Security Interest Enforcement Rules, 2002 [for short the Rules].

¶27

Applicant is a third party who has filed the present SA challenging the Sale Notice dated 16.04.2026 scheduling the sale to be held on 08.05.2026 along with the SA, IA 882/2026 is a petition for an advance hearing stand allowed taking the matter on board and IA 883/2026 is a petition to seeking for an Interim stay of the sale notice dated 16.04.2026 fixing the date of the auction sale on 08.05.2026.

¶28

It is contended that the applicant is the earlier owner who has executed the sale deed favoring the 2^nd respondent who is the borrower of the 1^st respondent. The applicant has produced the sale deed dated 23.03.2022 executed in favor of the 2^nd respondent who is Mr. Sathish Kumar for a sale consideration of Rs.1,75,00,000/- and have executed the sale deed which is also registered in the office of the sub-registrar. However, the applicant contends that the sale deed was executed fraudulently on the property and a police complaint is also lodged on 16.07.2025.

¶29

Further, the applicant also produced the possession notice dated 10.11.2025 and e-auction sale notice paper publication on 16.04.2026 though the applicant claims to be a third party and the earlier owner of the mortgage property cannot have any right over the property as the sale is admittedly executed by the applicant in favour of the 2^nd respondent which

¶30

is also registered in the sub-registry. Hence, applicant is only a third party who cannot interdict the sale and respondent bank is at liberty to proceed

¶31

Uploaded in E-Drt on 05.05.2026 at 02:36 P.M

¶32

IA No.883/2026 In SA No.274/2026

¶33

¶34

05.05.2026

¶35

with the auction sale as scheduled. Accordingly, IA No.883/2026 stands dismissed.

¶36

List the matter on 03.06.2026 for report of the status of the bids.

¶37

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

¶38

(Dictated to Steno (Arti), transcribed by her, corrected, signed and pronounced by me on this the 05^th day of May, 2026

¶39

Uploaded in E-Drt on 05.05.2026 at 02:36 P.M

Mr SaiKrishnan v. Icici Bank Limited

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mr SaiKrishnan 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Indian Bank versus Ms Abo Autocom

Ramakrishnan Subbaiyan versus State Bank of India

Yes Bank versus Lavanya Proprietrix M/S Lavan Drug House

Muthuraman versus Bank of India

Sivakumar versus Hdfc Bank

Yes Bank versus Arputhasamy Sebastian