Dismissed

Ramchandra Reddy Manda v. Reliance Commercial Finance Ltd.

DRT5 Jan 2026SA/289/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order dismisses an application challenging a secured creditor's steps to take physical possession of mortgaged property under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act. The Tribunal held that the creditor duly followed all statutory requirements before approaching the Civil Judge for an advocate commissioner.

What did the court decide?

Application dismissed with no interference in the possession proceedings initiated by the Respondent.

Ramchandra Reddy Manda versus Reliance Commercial Finance Ltd. — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2026)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS^{RECOVERYTRIBUNAL'IATHYDERABAD} DATED THISTHE^{5THDAY OF JANUARY'2026}

¶2

PRESENT:^{GUMMADI GOPICHAND, PRESIDING OFFICER}

¶3

sA.No.2a9/2023

¶4

Mr.Ramchandra^{ReddY Manda,} S/o late Narsimha^ReddY, Aged 50 Years,^{Occ:business,} Rf o H.No.8-4-17 l3D,^{Plot No'50'} Sai Ram^{Nagar ColonY,} .. . Applicant Champa Pet,^HYderabad

¶5

And

¶6

M/s Reliance^{Commercial Finance Ltd'} Rep. by its^{Authorized Officer,} Regd. CorPorate^{office:7th floor,} B-Wing, Trade^World, Kamala Mills^{ComPound, S'B' Marg,} Lower Parel,^{Mumbai-400012} Branch office'.^6-3-248 I^B I^1, Naveennagar,^{Banjara Hills,} ... ResPondent Hyderabad : Sri T. Sidlwr^Reddg Counsel for^{tle APPlicant} : Si P. Ramachandran Counsel for th.e^ResPondent :21.11.2025 Reserued on :05.01.2026 Pronounced^on :05.01.2026 Uploaded^on

¶7

-:ORDER:-

¶8

This application^{is frledby the Applicant u/s'17 of the SARFAESIAct'} 2002, challenging^{the steps initiated by the Respondentfor taking} schedule^{property through Advocate}

¶9

physical orders of I^{Addl.Sr.Civil Judge cum}

¶10

comml /23^{consequent to the Possession}

¶11

CMM, 2OO2, and^{to declarethe same}

¶12

The averments made^{in the application,in brief, are that:}

¶13

The Applicant availed^{mortgage loan of Rs.4'50 croresin the year 2015} from the Respondent.^{During Covid- 19 also, the Applicant paid} instalments regularly^{and even then, the Respondent initiated} proceedings under^{the provisions of SARFAESI Act,2OO2 against the} schedule^{property and issued demand notice dt.17.02.2022without} considering the^{substantialamounts paid by the Applicant'Thereafter'} the Respondent^{issuedpossessionnoticeand the said notice was not} published in two leading^{newspapersand also not affixed on the} schedule^{property.Without serving demand noticeand possession} notice to the^{Applicant, the Respondentinitiatedproceedings u/s 14 of} the SARFAES I^{Act,2OO2for taking physicalpossession of the schedule} property through^{advocatecommissioner pursuant to the orders of} I Addl.Sr.Civil^{Judge cum CMM, R.R' Districtin Crl'M'P'No'2O9123} and so the said^{proceedings are not legal' Hence the SA'}

¶14

The Respondent^{filed their Reply denying all the adverse allegations} madeintheSAandcontendedthattheApplicantafteravailingloanof Rs.4.50 crores^{from the Respondentby creatingmortgageagainst the} schedule^{property, committed default in repaying the loan dues and so'} the loan account^{was classified as NPA. Thereafter, the Respondent} issued demand notice^df.l7 'O2 '2022^{andpossessionnotice} dt.15.O7.2022^{as per the procedurecontemplated under the SARFAESI} Act,2oo2andRulesmadethereunder.Whenthereisnoresponsefrom

¶15

the Applicant,^{the Respondentsproceededu/ s 14 of the SARFAESI Act'} 2OO2 for appointment^{of advocate commissioner for takingphysical} possession of by following^due Process^{of law and} there are ,^Respondent PraYed^{to dismiss the}

¶16

uounsel^0^{5 ,,Afi} and Ld. Counsel^{for the} Respon the brought on^record.

¶17

Now the points that arise for consideration^are

¶18

i. uhether the Applicant lr,s^{established ang ualid grounds} for chattenging the steps initiated bg the^Respond.ent for^{taking phgsical} possession o1;[ tlve schedule propertg through aduocate^{commi.ssioner?}

¶19

ii. To uhat relief?

¶20

Point.llo.(tf:-

¶21

During the course of^{arguments, Id. Counselfor the Applicant and Ld'} Counsel for the Respondent^{reiteratedtheir respectiveversions as stated} supra.

¶22

There is no dispute regarding^{the fact that the Applicantavailedloan} facilities from the Respondent^{by creating mortgage in respect of the} schedule^{property towards security for the said loan and thereafter,the} Applicant committed default^{in repaying the loan dues.}

¶23

The specific contention^{of the Applicantis that the Respondent without} serving demand notice and^{possession notice tothe Applicant,} straightaway^proceeded for^{takingphysicalpossessionof the schedule} property through advocate commissioner^{u/s 14 of the SARFAESI Act,} 2OO2 and so, the^{said proceedings initiated by the Respondentare not} legal and valid.

¶24

g. Per contra, Respondent^{contendedthat they have duly followedthe} under the provisions^{ofSARFAESIAct, 2002 and} all the statutory notices^{to the Applicant} for taking^{physicalpossession of the}

¶25

lil"?"3FirYful SARFAESI Act,2OO2.

¶26

To substantiate their contention, the Respondent filed material documents along with the Reply. As per the said documents, it is clear that the Respondent issued Demand notice dt.17.O2.2O22 and sent the same to the Applicant through Regd. Post as evidenced by the postal track reports filed by the Respondent. When the Applicant failed to comply with the said demand notice, the Respondent issued possession notice dt.15.07.2022 u/s 13(4) of the Act,2OO2 and sent the said notice to the Applicant and others through Regd.post as evidenced by the postal track reports filed by the Respondent. The said notice was also published in Telugu and English daily newspapers as evidenced by the copies of paper publication filed by the Respondent and the said notice was also affixed on the schedule property as depicted in the copies of photographs liled by the Respondent. Thus the Respondent duly followed the procedure as contemplated u/r 8(1)&(2) of Security Interest (Enforcement) Rules, 2OO2 in issuing the impugned possession notice dt.15.07.2022 for taking possession of the schedule property.

¶27

As per the provisions of Section 14 of SARFAESI Act, 20O2, after issuance of possession notice u/s 13(4) of the SARFAESI Act, 2OO2, th.e secured creditor is at liberty to approach the concerned District Magistrate or Chief Judicial Magistrate for taking physical possession of the secured asset. In the instant case, after issuing demand notice and possession notice to the Applicant, the Respondent being secured creditor, approached I Addl.Sr.Civil Judge cum CMM, R.R. District u/s 14 of the SARFAESI Act, 2OO2 by frling Crl.M.P.No.209/23 for appointment of advocate commissioner for taking physical possession of the schedule property. The I Addl.Sr.Civil Judge cum CMM, R.R. District, after considering the material on record, appointed advocate commissioner and the said advocate commissioner visited the schedule property and issued notice dt.t4.o8.2023 for vacating the schedule propert5z. So the steps initia for taking physical possession of the schedule p.o$6.ry 17 AESI Act, 2OO2 are perfectly legal ) and valid.^* 1'l 0 5 "rtu 7026 1 1

¶28

So, considering all the circumstances, I am of the opinion that^the Applicant is not entitled to any relief. So, I see no^ground warranting interference of this Tribunal with the^proceedings initiated by^the Respondent for taking physical possession of the schedule^property u/ s¹⁴ of the SARFAESI Act,2002. Accordingly, this^point is answered in favour^of the Respondent and against the Applicant.

¶29

Potnt No.(ti)r

¶30

In the result, SA 289 123 is dismissed as there^{are no merits.}

¶31

Consequently, the Interlocutory^{Applications, pendingif any, shall stand} disposed of. No order as to costs.

¶32

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

¶33

(Didated to ttte P.S trdns$ibed bg her, @fteded signed and^{prcnauncedbUmeinth.e open coun otu this the 5} oJ January, 2026).

¶34

sd/(G. GOPr CHANDI PRESIDTI{G OFFICER

¶35

Ramchandra Reddy Manda v. Reliance Commercial Finance Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ramchandra Reddy Manda v. Reliance Commercial Finance Ltd.

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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Icici Bank Limited versus Sri. Doulathabad Ramesh Kumar

State Bank of India versus M/S.F 1 Fitness

Canara Bank versus M/S. Rama Textiles

Sri Jagadamba Pharma versus State Bank of India

Hari Om Traders versus Icici Bank Limited

Lakshmi Sai Fertilizers Pesticides and Seeds versus Union Bank of India