Debts Recovery Tribunal dismissed an application challenging possession proceedings initiated by State Bank of India under the SARFAESI Act. The Tribunal held that the Bank complied with statutory notice requirements and rules, finding the proceedings valid.
Application SA No. 281/2C-25 dismissed as having no merit.
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 DEBTSRECOVERYTRIBUNAL _ 1 AT HYDERABAD
DATED THISTHE5TH DAYOF MAY, 2026
PRESENT:SRIGUMMADIGOPTCHAND,PRESIDINGOFFICER
sA.No.281 /2C-25
Smt. Yasa Sunitha, W/o Y.Raji ReddY, Aged 40 years, Occ:housewife, H.No.9-37, Sri RamNagar, Adj. to Uppal BusDePot, Peerjadiguda, HYderabad-SoOO92 Business Address: M/s Santosh RiceTraders Shop NO.G-1, PlotNo.71, HS Residency,Buddha Nagar' ... Applicant Uppal Bus DePot,HYderabad-92.
Versus
State Bank of India Rep. by its Authorized Officer RACPC - Gunfoundry, Mezzanine floor, Gunfoundrybranch, ... Respondent Hyderabad-SOo 0O1.
: Si K.Kranti Kumar Counsel for the Applicant : Si Veera Shiua Kumar Counsel for Respondent Reserued on :06.04.2026 Pronounced on : 05.05.2026 Uploaded on : 06.05.2O26
ORDER
lication is filed by the Applicant u/s. 17 of the SARFAESI Act, the proceedings initiated by the Respondent for possession of the schedule property through Advocate uant to the orders of Ld.ll Addl.Sr.Civil Judge, 0 Svr,httr":$ri in trl.M.p.N o.ee l2o2S pursuant to the possession notice dt. 16.01 .2O25.and to declare the same as illegal and void. ."r ' ., ,/] ).* .-),':,' t ,. ^.: -''- . .-t)' :*'i .-.. ,y'/t ' ;'
T.niffq:;i*."fdrdent issued possessionnotice dt.16.0t.2025 and, the said noticq"-rlras sent to the Applicant and co-borrower through Regd.p.:tp.f$the same was published in Financial Express and ',."-\
.r^ . , ^....u-.a /r/, ':f 1
Ninadam daily newspapers and the said notice was also affixed on the schedule property. After issuing demand notice and possession notice, the Respondent proceeded u/s 14 of the SARFAESI Act, 2002 and the advocate commissioner appointed by the Ld.ll Addl.Sr.Civil Judge, Malkajgiri in Crl.M.P.No .99 125, issued vacate notice dt.24.06.2O25 to the Applicant to vacate the schedule property. Thus the Respondent has duly followed the procedure and there are no violations. Accordingly, Respondent prayed to dismiss the SA.
Point .hlo.(if :-
f s t t
facts of the case are that the Applicant availed loan e Respondent and thereafter, committed default in .-YB es. IIAY t1p5 * $ *Thespecificcon n of the Applicant is that the Respondent without ce and possession notice, straightaway, initiated (6fure.F# srffi"ra,
proceedings for taking physical possession of the schedule property through advocate commissioner u/s 14 of the SARFAESI Act, 2OO2 without following the procedure and so, the said proceedings initiated by the Respondent against the schedule property are null and void and after issuing possession notice, the Applicant paid substantial amounts.
filed by the Respondent and the said notice was also affixed on the schedule property as depicted in the copies of photographs filed by the Respondent. Thus, the Respondent has duly followed Rule 8(1)&(2) of Security Interest (Enforcement) Rules, 2OO2 in issuing possession notice dt.16.0t.2025.
Point No.(ii):-
W.rY
(Dictated to the P.S, transcibed by her, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in the open court on this the 5t, dag of Mag, 2026)
sd/(G. GOPr CHAND)
6
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the secured creditor could lawfully initiate proceedings under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act for physical possession after following mandatory notice requirements?
Whether the Applicant established valid grounds to challenge the recovery proceedings initiated by the Respondent?
Whether the Applicant was legally entitled to any relief against the impugned possession proceedings?
4 provisions across 2 enactments
Smt. Yasa Sunitha
State Bank of India
G. Gopichand
As recorded by the court registry
2 orders share this CNR
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
