Dismissed

Mrs Meera Jayaram v. Canara Bank

DRT9 Jun 2026SA/375/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal dismissed a Securitization Application challenging a Sec.14 order for possession of mortgaged property. The Tribunal held the application infructuous as the bank had already completed the sale process to an auction purchaser who paid the full consideration, rendering the possession application exercised and valid.

What did the court decide?

The Securitization Application was dismissed as the prayer for possession had become infructuous due to the successful sale of the property to an auction purchaser who paid the full consideration.

Mrs Meera Jayaram versus Canara Bank — Execution and Attachment | DRT (2026)

SA No.375/2024

09.06.2026

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHENNAI

¶5

Dated this the 09^th day of June, 2026

¶6

Present: SMT. S.V. GOWRAMMA Presiding Officer

¶7

SARFAESI APPLICATION No. 375 of 2024

¶8

Mrs. Meera Jayaram, W/o of Mr. K.R.Jayaram, No.81/3, Tank Bund Road, Nungambakkam, Chennai-600 034. ….Applicant -Vs-

¶9

Canara bank Rep. by its Authorised Officer Mrs. N. Suguna, Kelleys Branch, 207, Purasaiwakkam High Road, Chennai-600 007. ….Respondent

¶10

Counsels on record / appeared:

¶11

Counsel for Applicant : M/s. K. Ramesh Counsel for respondent : M/s. S. Kesavan, M. Gunasekaran, &

¶12

M. Gopi.

¶13

ORDER ON SA 375/2024

¶14

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

¶15

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

¶16

The applicant has challenged the Sec.14 order dated 28.05.2024 in Crl.M.P. No.3108 of 2024 passed by Chief Metropolitan Magistrate Court, Egmore Chennai and the outstanding amount due as per Sec.14 order is Rs.80,60,811/-

¶17

Uploaded on 09.06.2026 at 5.10pm

SA No.375/2024

09.06.2026

The Applicant and her husband approached the respondent for a Housing Loan to purchasing a new flat, considering the same, the Respondent bank sanctioned the Housing Loan and applicant's property has been mortgaged in favour of the Respondent bank.

¶22

3.1 It is submitted that in the sanction Memorandum the property is described as "EMT of all that piece and parcel of UDS of 411 Sqft out of 2052 sqft situated at Flat No.B2, II Floor, New Door No.57, old door No.23, K C Garden 4th Street, Peravallur village, Chennai - 600 032, bearing OS No 37/4 part TS No.2/1 lock No.10, as per patta TS No.2/2., measuring to an extent of 2052 sq ft plinth area of 1110 sq ft in No 04, ward No.50 corporation of Chennai lying with in the RD of sembium and RD of Chennai".

¶23

3.2 But the description of the property as mentioned in the sale Agreement and Construction Agreement and Sale Notice is "II floor; Flat No.2 whereas in the Demand notice, possession notice and in Sec 14 application it is mentioned the flat as No.A1, first floor by the Respondent bank on this ground itself prays to set aside the said order.

¶24

3.3 The Applicant requested the Respondent to grant some time to settle the loan but the loan account was classified as NPA and the bank had issued the Demand Notice and the Possession notice, which are not served neither on the Applicant nor Applicant's Husband.

¶25

3.4 The Respondent filed the section 14 application before the Hon'ble Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore, Chennai which came to be allowed on 28.05.2024 and had appointed the Advocate Commissioner

¶26

Uploaded on 09.06.2026 at 5.10pm

SA No.375/2024

09.06.2026

Mr.K.Abdulowais to take possession of the schedule mentioned property after taking inventory and handover the same to the Respondent bank.

¶31

3.5 In spite of all the follow-up the Respondent did not provide support nor the proper information to the applicant, hence this application under section 17 of the SARFAESI Act challenging the action of the Respondent as no notice under the SARFAESI act is served which clearly signifies that the action of the respondent is illegal.

¶32

3.6 In the grounds, it is contended that the Impugned order dated 28/05/2024 is not maintainable under the law, as per the sanction memorandum and construction agreement and sale agreement have been mentioned Flat No.2, II floor, however the Demand notice, Possession notice, sec 14 application and sale notice have been mentioned as the flat No.A1, first floor. The Respondent bank gave false schedule property and got the Impugned order form the Hon'ble Chief Metropolitan Magistrate Court Egmore Chennai.

¶33

3.7 It is submitted that Sec 14 application and affidavit filed before Hon'ble CMM Court Egmore Chennai have not mentioned the aggregated amount and amount due in sec 14 of SARFAESI Act, 2002. The classification of the Applicant account as NPA is against the norms and guidelines of the RBI and against the provisions of the statute, as the Applicant's had been paying installments regularly to the Respondent bank. The Respondent bank has not filed with the Central registry, particulars of mortgage as per the section 23 of SARFAESI Act.

¶34

Uploaded on 09.06.2026 at 5.10pm

SA No.375/2024

09.06.2026

3.8 The Respondent bank suppressed the material facts of the schedule mentioned property and wrongly mentioned without filing the Construction Agreement and Sale Agreement before the Hon'ble СMM Court and got the Impugned order.

¶39

3.9 The Possession notice is in violation of Rule 8 of SIE Rules and the notice under Sec. 13 (4) of the Act is neither served nor affixed. Hence the measures are not in accordance with the provisions of the Act and Rules. One these grounds, the applicant prays to set aside the Sec.14 order passed by Hon’ble CMM Court, Egmore Chennai.

¶40

The respondent has filed the counter contending that the applicant along with her husband Mr.K.R. Jayaram have approached the respondent bank for housing loan and purchase the flat under Construction.

¶41

4.1 The respondent bank granted a housing loan of Rs.39,09,049/- to the applicant on execution of various loan document along with her husband on 16.04.2010 and specifically agreed for the terms a conditions referred in the same, the applicant has deposited the title deeds in respect of schedule mentioned property on 05.05.2010.

¶42

4.2 The housing loan was granted to purchase the undivided share of land measuring about 411 sq.ft forming a part of the total extent of land 2050 Sq.ft comprised in O.S.37/4, T.S.2/1 block No.10 situated in new door no.57, old door no.23, K.C.Garden 4th street, peravallur village, chennai 82. The applicant also entered into construction agreement with the M/s.V.Ramesh proprietor of M/s.AJ City Makers on 01.03.2010 and thereby

¶43

Uploaded on 09.06.2026 at 5.10pm

SA No.375/2024

09.06.2026

the builder has agreed to put up Flat No.A1 in the first Floor with plinth area of 1110 Sq.Ft inclusive of all common areas of the building to be constructed by the builder. Based on the deed of sale dated 19.04.2010 vide document no.3137/2010 at SRO Sembium, the applicant has purchased Undivided Share of land.

¶48

4.3 Subsequent to the completion of the construction the applicant has occupied his flat together with undivided share of land which is morefully described in the schedule.

¶49

4.4 The applicant has agreed to repay the loan amount with interest on monthly installments spread over to 240 months including 6-month repayment holiday period. Unfortunately, the applicant failed to pay the monthly installments, despite the request and demand made by bank and account became NPA on 30.06.2016 and issued the demand notice under Section 13(2) of SARFAESI Act on 15.12.2017 granted 60 days’ time to settle entire liability of Rs.80,60,811/-, as there was no response from the applicant the respondent bank proceeded further and issued possession Notice in respect of schedule mentioned property on 21.06.2018 and took symbolic possession of the same.

¶50

4.5 Thereafter, the bank proceeded with the sale of the mortgaged property by issuance of sale notice to the applicant as well as to the public on 29.08.2022 by following the procedures contemplated under the Act and fixed the e-auction. However, the sale did not take place.

¶51

Uploaded on 09.06.2026 at 5.10pm

SA No.375/2024

09.06.2026

4.6 The respondent bank issued another sale notice on 24.06.2023 fixed the e-auction on 15.05.2023, fixing the reserve price at Rs.27,60,000/-. The sale notice also sent to applicant and necessary publication also issued in the newspaper. The sale was conducted on 15.10.2023, one Ms.Afshan, D/o Syed Siraj became successful bidder for a sum of Rs.27,70,000/- who paid the entire amount, hence sale certificate was issued in her favour on 17.06.2023.

¶56

4.7 In order to give the physical possession of the schedule mentioned property the respondent filed S.14 application in Crl.M.P.3108 of 2024. The Hon'ble CMM Court Egmore on perusal of the affidavit as well as document passed order on 28.05.2024, appointed Advocate Commissioner to take physical possession of the schedule property.

¶57

4.8 The applicant has challenged the proceedings before this Hon'ble court by filing the present S.A.375 of 2024, when the matter was taken up on 02.07.2024, the Hon'ble Tribunal was pleased to pass conditional order and also granted status quo to be maintained until further orders. The applicant miserably failed to comply with conditional order passed by Hon'ble Tribunal.

¶58

4.9 The present SA is not maintainable in view of the sale of the schedule property as early as 15.05.2023. Moreover as the auction purchaser has paid the entire amount and the same has been adjusted towards the loan amount and therefore nothing survives in the present appeal.

¶59

Uploaded on 09.06.2026 at 5.10pm

SA No.375/2024

09.06.2026

4.10 It is further submitted that applicant specific contention that the Flat No.2 in second floor has been mentioned in the Sale agreement, construction agreement is hereby denied. On the other hand, the respondent bank proceeded only in respect of Flat No.A1, First Floor and the same alone was handed over to the auction purchaser. Hence, the respondent bank prays for dismissal of the SA.

¶64

Heard both sides of the Counsels and perused the records of the case.

¶65

The applicant availed housing loan of Rs.39,09,049/- vide sanctioned letter dated 08.04.2010. The applicant has executed the loan documents and has mortgaged the property by deposit of title deeds on 05.05.2010. The applicant purchased Flat No.A1, First Floor measuring to an extent of 1110 sq.ft., i.e. 102.78 sq.ft., Super built up area inclusive of all common areas in the building proposed to be constructed and also includes for the use of the second part and bank has proceeded under the Act on the mortgaged property.

¶66

5.1 It is an admitted fact that the applicant did not service the loan and account was classified as NPA on 30.06.2017. Subsequently the bank has issued the Sec.13(2) demand notice on 15.12.2017 granting 60 days’ time to settle the entire liability of Rs.80,60,811/-. The applicant did not reply the amount nor raised any objections, bank has proceeded further and issued the possession notice on 21.06.2018 and took symbolic possession of the property.

¶67

Uploaded on 09.06.2026 at 5.10pm

SA No.375/2024

09.06.2026

5.2 Further it is seen that the bank has proceeded and issuing the sale notice on 29.08.2022 as per the procedures, however the sale did not take place. It is a matter of facts that the bank has issued the 2^nd sale notice dated 24.06.2023 fixing the reserve price at Rs.27,60,000/- copy of the sale notice also sent to the applicant and necessary publication also issued in the newspaper, and the sale is successfully held on 15.10.2023 to one Ms. Afshan, D/o Syed Siraj who has successful bidder for a sum of Rs.27,70,000/- who has paid the entire sale consideration and hence, the sale certificate was issued on 17.06.2023.

¶72

5.3 The respondent bank has filed an application u/s.14 in Crl.M.P.No.3108.2024 along with the affidavit and supporting documents The Ld. CMM vide order dated 28.05.2024 allowed the application and appointed the Advocate Commissioner to take the physical possession of the property which has been challenged in the present SA.

¶73

5.4 It is seen that the recorded the bank has taken the physical possession of the property on 06.05.2025 and the prayer in the SA has been rendered infructuous, nothing survives for further adjudication and the other challenges to the measures is not within the period of 45 days as required under S.17 of the Act.

¶74

5.5 It is appropriate to mention the declaration of The Hon’ble Supreme Court and various Hon’ble High Courts in various judgments has held that the power of Designated Court under Section 14 SARFAESI Act, 2002 is ministerial and non- adjudicatory in nature and the process to be followed

¶75

Uploaded on 09.06.2026 at 5.10pm

SA No.375/2024

09.06.2026

under Section 14 does not involve any element of quasi-judicial function nor it requires any application of mind.

¶80

5.6 The Supreme Court in the judgment of Authorized Officer, Indian Bank v D Visalakshi and other, has held that a Chief Judicial Magistrate is equally competent to deal with the application moved by the secured creditor under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act. Hence, the Sec.14 dated 28.05.2024 in Crl.M.P. No.3108/2024 passed by the Hon’ble CMM Court, Egmore Chennai is a valid Order.

¶81

5.7 Additionally, Section 14(3) of the SARFAESI Act statuses that no action taken by the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate or District Magistrate (or any officer authorized by them) under S.14 can be challenged in court or before any other authority. This provision ensures that the authority of these officials in enforcing security interests is final and not subject to further review.

¶82

5.8 T hus, the Sec.14 order dated 28.05.2024 in Crl.M.P. No.3108/2024 passed by the Hon’ble CMM Court, Egmore Chennai is after due consideration of the application, affidavit in support of compliance of procedures along with documents is an execution Order issued where no adjudication is required. The Order is passed considering the due compliance of the provisions of the S. 14 [i-ix].

¶83

5.9 On examination of pleadings and documents produced by respective parties, the Tribunal comes to conclusion that the respondent bank as

¶84

Uploaded on 09.06.2026 at 5.10pm

SA No.375/2024

09.06.2026

secured creditor has initiated measures under the Act after classifying the account as NPA.

¶89

5.10 Consequent to classification of account as NPA has issued S.13[2] Demand Notice followed by Possession Notice and have complied all the procedures as contemplated under the Act and the Rules with supporting documents. Thus it is held that the Demand Notice u/s S.13[2] dated 15.12.2017 and S.13[4] Possession Notice dated 21.06.2018 are held as valid notices issued under the Act.

¶90

5.11 For the foregoing reasons, the present SA is only to be dismissed. Accordingly, SA stands disposed as infructuous. Interim Order granted, if any stands vacated, pending IAs are disposed of in terms of this final order. No order as to cost.

¶91

Sd/-

¶92

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

¶93

( Dictated to Steno (Suriya), transcribed by him, corrected, signed and pronounced by me on this the 09^th day of June, 2026)

¶94

ANNEXURES

¶95

LIST OF DOCUMENTS PRODUCED BY THE APPLICANT

¶96

Sl. No.	Description of Documents	Documents No.
1.	Petition filed under Sec 14 of SARFAESI Act 2002 dated 13.09.2023	A-1
2.	Affidavit filed by the Respondent bank dated 25.10.2023	A-2
3.	Sanction Memorandum issued by the Respondent bank dated 08.04.2010	A-3
4.	Copy of the Agreement of Sale between Applicant and builder dated 01.03.2010	A-4

¶97

Uploaded on 09.06.2026 at 5.10pm

SA No.375/2024

09.06.2026

5.	Copy of the Sale Deed Applicant registered as 2010 on the file of 19.04.2010	in the name of the document No.3137 of SRO Sembium dated	A-5
6.	Copy of the Demand Respondent bank to 15.12.2017	Notice issued by the the applicant dated	A-6
7.	Copy of the Possession Respondent bank to 21.06.2018	Notice issued by the the applicant dated	A-7
8.	Copy of the Sale Notice is bank to the applicant ban	sued by the Respondent k dated 29.08.2022	A-8
9.	Sec 14 Order in Crl.M.P. passed by the Hon’b Magistrate Court Chennai	No.3108 of 2024 order le Chief Metropolitan dated 28.05.2024	A-9

¶102

LIST OF DOCUMENTS PRODUCED BY THE RESPONDNET

¶103

Sl. No.	Description of Documents	Documents No.
1.	Sale Notice issued by the bank dated 26.04.2023	R-1
2.	Returned Covers	R-2
3.	Paper publication of E-Auction Sale in English Newspaper namely Times of India dated 28.04.2023	R-3
4.	Paper publication of E-Auction Sale in Tamil Newspaper namely Dinakaran dated 28.04.2023	R-4
5.	Sale Certificate issued by the bank in favour of the Auction Purchaser dated 17.06.2023	R-5

¶104

SCHEDULE OF PROPERTY

¶105

Schedule -A

¶106

All that piece and parcel of the land situated in New Door No.57, Old Door No.23, K.C.Garden IV Street, Peravallur Village, Chennai-600 082, bearing O.S.No.37/4 Part T.S. No.2/1, Block No.10, as per Patta T.S.No.2/2, measuring to an extent of 2052 Sq.ft.,i.e., 190 sq.mt. (as Patta 1990 sq.ft) in zone No.04, Ward No.50, Corporation of Chennai bounded as follows;

¶107

North by: Vengal Thottam 4^th Street Cross lane T.S.No.23 South by: Venkatarayalu’s house T.S.No.2/2

¶108

Uploaded on 09.06.2026 at 5.10pm

SA No.375/2024

09.06.2026

East by: Vengal Thottam 4^th Street Cross lane T.S.No.4 and West by: Vengal Thottam Street, T.S.No.1

¶113

Within the Sub-Registration District of Sembium and Registration District of Chennai Central.

¶114

Schedule -B

¶115

All that piece and parcel of the undivided share of 411 sq.ft., i.e., 38.06 Sq.mt forming part of the land described in the Schedule “A” situated within the Registration District of North Chennai and the Sub-Registration Office of Sembium, Chennai with Flat No.A1, in the First Floor measuring to an extent of 1110 sq.ft., i.e.,102.78 sq.ft., Super built up area inclusive of all common areas in the building proposed to be constructed and also includes for the use of the second part.

¶116

Sd/-

¶117

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

¶118

Uploaded on 09.06.2026 at 5.10pm

Mrs Meera Jayaram v. Canara Bank

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mrs Meera Jayaram v. Canara Bank

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Union Bank of India versus Mrs R Gayathri and another

State Bank of India versus Jagenathan

Canara Bank versus Cresent Enteprises

Central Bank of India versus Sasi

Punjab National Bank versus Uma Mageswari

Karur Vysya Bank versus Shabeer Ahmed