Dismissed

S Srinivasan v. Tamilnad Mercantile Bank Limited

DRT6 Mar 2026SA/619/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This DRT dismissed an application challenging a Sale Certificate under the SARFAESI Act. The Court found the bank had validly initiated proceedings and conducted the auction in compliance with statutory provisions after the applicant failed to comply with interim stay orders.

What did the court decide?

Sale Certificate registered in favor of the auction purchaser is held valid; SA stands dismissed.

S Srinivasan versus Tamilnad Mercantile Bank Limited — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2026)

SA No.619/2023

06.03.2026

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHENNAI

¶5

Dated this the 06^th day of March, 2026

¶6

Present: SMT. S.V. GOWRAMMA Presiding Officer

¶7

SARFAESI APPLICATION No. 619 of 2023

¶8

Mr.S.Srinivasan S/o. Mr.Sundaram D.No. 48 Pillaiyar Koil Street Bommidi village and post, Dharmapuri District —635 301. …Applicant

¶9

-Vs-

¶10

The Authorized Officer, TamilNadu Mercantile Bank Ltd., Bommidi Branch, GRS Hospital Complex, I Floor, No.30/5A, Salem Main Road, Bommidi -635 301 Dharmapuri District.

¶11

C. Riyas, Son of Mr. Chanbasha, No. 166(2), NSR Hardwares, Salem Main Road, Boommidi Post, Pappireddipatti Taluk, Dharmapuri -635 301. …Respondents

¶12

Counsels on record / appeared:

¶13

Counsel for Applicant : M/s. M. Abubakkar & G. Sanjeevi Counsel for 1^st respondent : M/s. KCYR Associates, Mr. E. Kumar, Mr. K. Dinesh Counsel for 2^nd respondent : Placed ex-parte on 17.09.2025

SA No.619/2023

06.03.2026

ORDER ON SA 619/2023

¶18

The present Securitization Application [SA] is filed on 06.01.2023 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 the action and the measure taken by the secured creditor under the Security Interest Enforcement Rules, 2002 [for short the Rules].

¶19

The applicant has challenged the Sale Certificate registered on 18.11.2022 in continuation of the Sale on 16.03.2022 issued by the 1^st respondent in favor of 2^nd respondent.

¶20

Pleadings of the applicant:

¶21

The applicant is the borrower who had approached the respondent for sanction of certain credit facilities and bank had sanctioned the three loans, Rs.15 lakhs in the year 2016, Rs.6 lakhs in the year 2018 and further Rs.4.72 lakhs in the year 2020. The applicant had created equitable mortgage in respect of the property and also executed necessary security documents in favor of the respondent bank. Further, the respondent bank has classified the loan account of the applicant into NPA as per the RBI guidelines.

¶22

3.1 Suddenly the respondent bank has issued statutory Demand Notice dated 17.06.2021 and Possession Notice dated 08.09.2021, only for the loan amount of Rs.15 Lakhs. After the issuance of the Possession Notice

SA No.619/2023

06.03.2026

dated 08.09.2021 the Applicant has preferred an S.A.No.113 of 2021 and obtained an interim order against the possession Notice but the Applicant complied only 1^st part of the conditional order.

¶27

3.2 It is submitted that the respondent issued Sale Notice dated 08.02.2022 to the applicant calling upon the applicant to pay the amount of Rs.8,76,252.60/-, Rs.15,61,626.36, and Rs.4,71,679/-. Further, in sale notice the respondent bank allegedly claimed that they have issued the demand notice and Possession Notice for other two loan accounts and no such Notices were issued by the respondent for Rs.6 lakhs and Rs.4.72 lakhs.

¶28

3.3 The sale notice dated 08.02.2022 fixing the sale on 16.03.2022 was not affixed on the schedule Property which was challenged before this Tribunal in SA No.111 of 2022 and SA came to be disposed.

¶29

3.4 Though the Applicant had obtained an interim order and paid the condition payment belatedly to 1^st respondent which is also refused. Further the 1^st respondent has conducted the sale on 16.03.2022 and returned the conditional payment to the Applicant. Subsequently the 1^st respondent has sent demand draft for Rs.17,09,355.51/- to the Applicant stating as balance sale consideration which was returned by the Applicant and the 1^st defendant had transferred the said amount to Applicant Account.

¶30

3.5 However, the respondent bank has registered the sale certificate on 18.11.2022 in favor of the 2^nd respondent which was intimated by the 1^st respondent vide letter dated 29.12.2022. The applicant had verified

SA No.619/2023

06.03.2026

Encumbrance Certificate and applied certified copy of sale certificate. Further, the 1^st respondent did not properly adjust the amounts paid by the borrower and also charged interest and penal interest against the RBI guidelines.

¶35

3.6 It is evident from the sale notice that the applicant made substantial payments even after the demand notice and possession notice, but the respondent bank failed to give proper credit to the payments made by them and in the possession notice there is no specific mention about the payments made by the applicant.

¶36

3.7 The applicant wanted to redeem his family property by paying the entire due amount. It is submitted that all the measures initiated by the respondent bank without issuing demand and possession notice to other loans are contrary to law and justice.

¶37

3.8 In the grounds it is contended that the respondent did not issue the 13(2) Demand notice to the applicant for Rs.6 lakhs and Rs.4.72 lakhs, the respondent impaired the statutory rights vested with the applicant under Section 13(3-A) of the Act. The respondent willfully suffocated the right of the applicant under Section 13(3-A) and the 13(4) Notice issued by the respondent is prima facie bad in law and void ab initio.

¶38

3.9 The bank has not followed the procedures under Rule 8(1) of SIE Rules. The respondent bank has not affixed the sale notice on the property and not published in two leading newspapers as per Rule 8(2) of SIE Rules

SA No.619/2023

06.03.2026

and the sale notice does not contains any proper measurement and identification of the secured asset.

¶43

3.10 The classification of loan account as NPA is in violation of RBI guidelines. The bank has failed to serve the sale notice and satisfy the statutory requirements prescribed under the various provisions of the SARFAESI Act and the relevant rules framed thereunder.

¶44

3.11 The Sale Notice issued by the respondent bank is against the settled legal principles laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court. It is seen that the outstanding due amount is not crystallized to the applicant before issuance of the notice under 13(4) (a) of the Act.

¶45

3.12 The 1^st respondent has failed to produce any valuation report in the previous SA; hence the applicant prays to set aside the Sale certificate registered on 18.11.2022 pursuant to the sale conducted on 16.03.2022.

¶46

Objections of the 1^st respondent bank:

¶47

The 1^st respondent bank has filed their counter contending that the allegations and averments made by the applicant are baseless and frivolous. It is submitted that the applicant and his mother Mrs. Sagunthala who is Mortgagor Cum Guarantor has jointly availed the credit facilities as follows;

¶48

i. Home loan for amount of Rs.6 Lakhs on 23.08.2011 for construction purpose

¶49

ii. Term Loan facility for amount of Rs.15 Lakhs vide sanction letter dated 16.09.2016 for Purchase of machinery.

SA No.619/2023

06.03.2026

iii. Term Loan (MSME) facility for amount of Rs.15 Lakhs vide sanction letter dated 24.10.2019 for Purchase of machinery.

¶54

iv. Term Loan (GECL) —Rs.4,72,000/- vide Sanction Letter dated 29.09.2020.

¶55

4.1 It is submitted that the Mortgagor Cum Guarantor Mrs. Sagunthala is the mother of Applicant Mrs.S. Sasikala is wife of the Applicant stood as Guarantor for the credit facilities availed by the applicant. The 4 credit facilities were granted on the collateral security of the immovable property in the name of the Guarantor Mrs. Sakunthala w/o. Mr.Sundaram.

¶56

4.2 The Guarantor cum Mortgagor has deposited the title deeds as security towards the credit facilities availed by the Applicant by way of 4 Memorandum of Deposit of title Deeds:

¶57

a. Memorandum of Deposit of Title Deeds dated' 25.08.2011, registered as Doc. No. 3041/2011, with SRO Pappireddypatti — for the first loan granted on 23.08.2011

¶58

b. Memorandum of Deposit of Title Deeds dated 16.09.2016 registered as Doc. No. 2589/2016 with SRO Pappireddypatti — for the first & second loan granted on 16.09.2016

¶59

c. Supplemental Memorandum of Deposit of Title Deeds dated 24.10.2019 registered as Doc. No. 2888/2019 with SRO Pappireddypatti. — for the first second & third loan granted on 24.10.2019

¶60

d. Memorandum of Deposit of Title Deeds dated 30.09.2020 registered as Doc. No. 2788/2020 with SRO Pappireddypatti — for all the loans, with an intension to create security interest over the mortgaged property with the respondent bank.

¶61

4.3 The loan account of the borrower was not operated in terms of the conditions and failed to regularize the loan account despite several requests made by the respondent bank. Hence, the Term Loan account was declared

SA No.619/2023

06.03.2026

as NPA on 31.03.2021 and 1^st respondent bank has issued 2 Sec.13(2) demand dated 17.06.2021.

¶66

4.4 The Term Loan account was declared as NPA on 31.03.2021 calling upon applicant to remit the entire outstanding liability for Rs.8,14,541.60as on 31.05.2021.

¶67

4.5 The Term Loan (MSME) & GECL were declared as NPA on 31.03.2021 and calling upon applicant to remit the entire outstanding in the liability for Rs.21,00,307.22- respectively outstanding liability as on 31.05.2021 in the accounts are — TL (3" Loan) — Rs.16,08,778.70 & TL (4th loan GECL) — Rs.4,91,528.52 to the Bank and also informed about the initiation of SARFAESI action against them, which was duly acknowledged by the Applicant and Guarantor cum Mortgagor respectively on 23.06.2021 & 28.06.2021.

¶68

4.6 The 1st respondent Bank has issued 2 Demand notices dated 17.06.2021 out of which one demand notice is for Term Loan (priority Micro Manufacturing Enterprises) account no.041700460100190 and another Demand notice dated 17.06.2021 is for 2 loan accounts (viz) Term Loan account no.041700460100273 & Term Loan (GECL) account no. 041700460100342.

¶69

4.7 After completion of 60 days’ notice period, as required by the provisions of sub sec (2) of sec 13, the respondent took symbolic possession of the property on 08.09.2021 in terms of Section 13(4) of the SARFAESI Act.

SA No.619/2023

06.03.2026

4.8 The Sec.13(4) possession notice dated 08.09.2021 was sent to Applicant by RPAD and the same was duly acknowledged by them on 13.09.2021. The possession notice was duly affixed in the schedule and the photographs of the same affixing the notice were taken on 08.09.2021. The possession notice published in two leading newspapers one in Tamil “Dinakaran” and another one in English “Times of India” both dated 14.09.2021.

¶74

4.9 The Possession notice dated 08.09.2021 which was challenged by the Applicant in SA 133 of 2021 before this Hon'ble Tribunal, when the case came up for hearing on 11.10.2021, the Hon'ble Tribunal passed the following order:

¶75

As the applicant is willing to discharge his debt, applicant is permitted to deposit 10% of the possession notice amount to the credit of his loan account within three weeks from the date of this order and on compliance of the same, respondent bank is directed to maintain status quo as on the date of compliance. Applicant is also directed to deposit a further 10% of the notice amount to the credit of his loan account within three weeks thereafter and in any case not later than 23.11.2021. On compliance of the second condition, there shall be an interim stay of all further proceedings under SARFAESI Act initiated by the respondent bank. Non-compliance of either of the conditions would entitle respondent bank to proceed further in accordance to law.

SA No.619/2023

06.03.2026

4.10 It is submitted that the applicant has complied with the 1st conditional order and failed to comply with the 2nd conditional order. The 1st respondent bank issued sale notice dated 08.02.2022 for the auction to be held on 16.03.2022 and Sale notice was sent to the applicant and others through RPAD which was duly received and acknowledged by them on 11.02.2022, and photos were taken while affixing the sale notice in the schedule premises on 08.02.2022 and notice was also published in two leading newspapers one in Tamil “Dinathanthi” and another one in English “Times of India” both dated 10.02.2022.

¶80

4.11 It is submitted that the sale notice dated 08.02.2022 which was challenged by the applicant filed another SA.No.111 of 2022, when the SA came up for hearing on 15.03.2022, the Honlble Tribunal passed the following order:

¶81

as applicant is willing to cause payments to the credit of their loan account, applicant is permitted to deposit a sum of Rs.5 lakhs to the credit of his loan account with respondent bank by or before 11 a.m. on 16.03.2022 and on compliance of the same, there shall be an order of status quo as on date and time of compliance. .Non, compliance of the above condition would entitle respondent to proceed further in accordance to law, including the contemplated sale scheduled on 16.03.2022.

¶82

4.12 The applicant has failed to complied with the conditional order and hence the sale was conducted on 16.03.2022 and the property was sold to the highest bidder Mr.Riyas Chand Basha for Rs.45,80,000/-. In the

SA No.619/2023

06.03.2026

meantime the 1st SA No 133 of 2021 (against PN dated 08.09.2021) which was dismissed on 07.04.2022.

¶87

As the applicant could not make out any tenable infirmities in the procedure adopted by the respondent bank while issuing the impugned possession notice and even otherwise, respondent bank has concluded upon the sale and adjusted the sale proceeds towards the loan dues, Present SA is devoid of merits and is liable to be dismissed. Accordingly this SA stands Dismissed."

¶88

4.13 It is submitted that the auction purchaser remitted the entire bid amount within the prescribed time and the same was credited to the loan account and the loan account has been closed on 30.04.2022 which was duly intimated to Applicant, Guarantor Mortgagor vide letter dated 30.04.2022 and the same was duly received and acknowledged by them on 10.05.2022.

¶89

4.14 The 2nd SA No 111 of 2022 (against SN dated 08.02.2022) which was disposed on 22.06.2022. Since the auction purchaser has deposited the entire proceeds, sale certificate dated 19.05.2022 was registered (18.11.2022-P-16) in favour of Mr.Riyas with SRO Pappireddypatti Vide Doc.No.4783 of 2022 on 23.12.2022.

¶90

4.15 Since the account has been closed and the same was informed to the Mortgagor Mrs.Sagunthala vide letter dated 06.07.2022 along with Demand Draft for remaining excess surplus amount and request them to vacate the mortgaged property premises to hand over the same with Auction

SA No.619/2023

06.03.2026

Purchaser and the same was duly received and acknowledged by her on 07.07.2022.

¶95

4.16 It is submitted that the Mortgagor Mrs.Sagunthala vide letter dated 12.10.2022 requested the 1st respondent bank to revalidate the DD which has been issued by the bank for remaining excess surplus amount and the same was duly done by the 1 st respondent bank and the same was utilized by the Mortgagor Mrs.Sagunthala on 18.10.2022.

¶96

4.17 In fact the Applicant did not cooperate to vacate the mortgaged property, hence the 1st respondent bank has filed Sec. 14 Application before the CJM Dharmapuri and obtained order in Crl.MP No. 9745 of 2023 on 07.02.2024 and taken physical possession of the property through the advocate commissioner on 19.02.2024 and the same was also handedover to the auction purchaser on 19.02.2024. Hence, the applicant filed this present appeal and challenged the Sale Certificate Vide SA.No.619.2023 and respondent bank prays for dismissal of the SA.

¶97

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

¶98

It is manifest from the records that the Applicant and the Mortgagor Cum Guarantor Mrs. Sagunthala who is mother of the Applicant jointly availed the credit facilities as follows;

¶99

A. Home loan for amount of Rs.6 Lakhs on 23.08.2011

¶100

B. Term Loan facility for amount of Rs.15 Lakhs vide sanction letter dated 16.09.2016

SA No.619/2023

06.03.2026

C. Term Loan (MSME) facility for amount of Rs.15 Lakhs vide sanction letter dated 24.10.2019

¶105

D. Term Loan (GECL) —Rs.4,72,000/- vide Sanction Letter dated 29.09.2020.

¶106

5.1 The mortgagor cum guarantor Mrs. Sagunthala is the mother of Applicant, one Mrs.S. Sasikala who is wife of the Applicant also stood as Guarantor for secure the credit facilities availed. However, that above 4 facilities were granted on the collateral security of the immoveable property standing in the name of the Guarantor Mrs. Sakunthala w/o. Mr.Sundaram apart from other Hypothecation of stock in trade and receivable etc.

¶107

5.2 It is seen that the Mrs.Sakunthala w/o. Mr.Sundaram the Guarantor cum Mortgagor has deposited the title deeds pertaining as security for the credit facilities availed by the Applicant by way of 4 MODTS dated 25.08.2011, 16.09.2016, 24.10.2019 and 30.09.2020 at SRO Pappireddypatti which is produced at Pg.95-135. Further, the 1^st respondent bank had filed CERSAI report duly evidencing registration of the security interest with the central registry which is produced at Pg.9294 of counter.

¶108

5.3 In fact, the account was operated in irregular manner, subsequently the account was not maintained in terms of the conditions and failed to regularize the account despite repeated requests made by the respondent. Further, in view of the non-regularization of the account of Term Loan

¶109

granted on 16.09.2016 was declared as NPA on 31.03.2021. The 1^st respondent bank has issued 2 Sec.13(2) demand notices dated 17.06.2021 under the SARFAESI Act.

SA No.619/2023

06.03.2026

5.4 The Term Loan account declared as NPA on 31.03.2021 calling upon to remit the entire outstanding in the liability for TL (2nd Loan) — Rs.8,14,541.60- as on 31.05.2021.

¶114

5.5 The Term Loan (MSME) & GECL granted on 24.10.2019 & 29.09.2020 respectively to the Applicant informing about the said accounts declared as NPA on 31.03.2021 and calling upon him to remit the entire outstanding in the liability for TL (3^rd & 4^th Loan) — Rs.21,00,307.22- respectively outstanding liability as on 31.05.2021 in the accounts are — TL (3" Loan) — Rs.16,08,778.70 & TL (4th loan GECL) — Rs.4,91,528.52.

¶115

5.6 The 1st respondent Bank has issued 2 Demand notices dated 17.06.2021 out of which one demand notice is for Term Loan (priority Micro Manufacturing Enterprises) A/c.No.041700460100190 and another Demand notice dated 17.06.2021 is for 2 loan accounts (viz) Term Loan A/c.No.041700460100273 & Term Loan (GECL) A/c.No. 041700460100342.

¶116

5.7 The demand notice sent by RPAD which the applicant and others have received the Demand Notice as per the Acknowledgement card produced at Pg.20-23 of 1^st respondent bank. In spite of receipt of Sec.13(2) demand notice as the borrower and the guarantor did not liquate the liability within the period of 60 days and nor raised any objections to the demand made.

¶117

5.8 The respondent issued the Sec.13(4) possession notice on 08.09.2021 was sent to the applicant and others by RPAD which was duly served as per Acknowledgement Cards produced at Pg.26-28. The

SA No.619/2023

06.03.2026

Possession Notice is published in two newspapers one in English “Times of India” and another one in Tamil “Dinakaran” both dated 14.09.2021 and the Possession Notice is affixed on the conspicuous place of the property as per the photograph of affixture produced at Page No.29 of 1^st respondent bank’s typed set.

¶122

5.9 The Possession notice dated 08.09.2021 was challenged by the Applicant in SA 133 of 2021 before this Hon'ble Tribunal. The Tribunal vide proceeding dated 10.11.2023 granted the conditional order which the applicant complied only with the 1st conditional order and failed to comply with the 2nd conditional order, hence the Said SA No 133 of 2021 (against PN dated 08.09.2021) which was dismissed on 07.04.2022.

¶123

5.10 The 1st respondent bank issued sale notice dated 08.02.2022 for the auction to be held on 16.03.2022 and Sale notice was sent to the applicant and others through RPAD which the applicant and others have received the Sale Notice as per the Acknowledgement card produced at Pg.35-37 of 1^st respondent bank. The Sale Notice is published in two newspapers one in English “Times of India” and another one in Tamil “Dinathanthi” both dated 10.02.2022 and the Sale Notice is affixed on the conspicuous place of the property as per the photograph of affixture produced at Page No.34 of 1^st respondent bank’s typed set.

¶124

5.11 The sale notice dated 08.02.2022 was challenged by the applicant in SA.No.111 of 2022, and the Hon’ble Tribunal was granted conditional order.

SA No.619/2023

06.03.2026

However, The Said SA No 111 of 2022 (against SN dated 08.02.2022) which was disposed on 22.06.2022.

¶129

5.12 The applicant failed to complied with the conditional order and hence the sale was conducted on 16.03.2022 and the property was sold to the highest bidder Mr.Riyas Chand Basha for Rs.45,80,000/-.

¶130

5.13 The auction purchaser remitted the entire bid amount within the prescribed time and the same was credited to the loan account and the loan account has been closed on 30.04.2022 which was duly intimated to Applicant, Guarantor Mortgagor vide letter dated 30.04.2022 and the applicant and others are duly received and acknowledgement card which is produced at Pg.47-49.

¶131

5.14 The auction purchaser has deposited the entire proceeds, sale certificate dated 19.05.2022 was registered (18.11.2022-P-16) in favour of Mr.Riyas with SRO Pappireddypatti Vide Doc.No.4783 of 2022 on 23.12.2022 which is produced at Pg.50-86. Since the account has been closed and the same was informed to the Mortgagor Mrs. Sagunthala vide letter dated 06.07.2022 along with Demand Draft for remaining excess surplus amount and request them to vacate the mortgaged property premises to hand over the same with Auction Purchaser and the same was duly received and acknowledged on 07.07.2022.

¶132

5.15 The Mortgagor Mrs.Sagunthala vide letter dated 12.10.2022 requested the 1st respondent bank to revalidate the DD which has been issued by the bank for remaining excess surplus amount and the same was

SA No.619/2023

06.03.2026

duly done by the 1st respondent bank and which was utilized by the Mortgagor Mrs. Sagunthala on 18.10.2022.

¶137

5.16 It is seen that the 1st respondent bank has filed Sec. 14 Application before the CJM Dharmapuri and obtained order in Crl.MP No. 9745 of 2023 on 07.02.2024 and taken physical possession of the property through the advocate commissioner on 19.02.2024 and the same was also handedover to the auction purchaser on 19.02.2024.

¶138

5.17 On examining of the facts, pleading and the documents produced by both parties, the respondent bank have established the due compliance of the measures initiated by them under the Act and Rules. It is also pertaining to note that the applicant have received the Sec.13(2) Demand Notice did not raise any objections to the demand made.

¶139

5.18 In fact the applicant had challenged the Sec.13(4) Possession Notice dated 08.09.2021 in SA.133 of 2021 and interim order granted by this Tribunal which the applicant failed to complied with the conditional order. Hence, the bank has proceeded in issuance of Sale Notice dated 08.02.2022 which is challenged by the applicant in SA.111 of 2022 and interim was granted status quo and applicant failed to comply with the conditional order. Hence, the bank has proceeded in conducting the auction and on receipt of the entire sale consideration, sale certificate is issued to the successful bidder which is challenged in the present SA.

¶140

5.19 The applicant is failed to make out any ground of violation or any infirmity in the measures taken by the respondent bank.

SA No.619/2023

06.03.2026

5.20 Therefore, the Tribunal concludes the measure taken by the respondent bank in issuance of Section 13(2) Demand Notice dated 17.06.2021 and Section 13(4) Possession notice dated 08.09.2021 are held as valid notices and the sale notice dated 08.02.2022; sale held on 16.03.2022 and Sale Certificates dated 18.11.2022 issued favoring auction purchaser are in accordance with the procedures as required under the Act and Rules made thereunder and same are held as valid measures.

¶145

5.21 For the foregoing reasons, the present SA fails and accordingly SA stands dismissed. Interim Order granted, if any stands vacated, pending IAs are disposed of in terms of this final order. No order as to cost.

¶146

Sd/-

¶147

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

¶148

( Dictated to Steno (Suriya), transcribed by him, corrected, signed and pronounced by me on this the 06^th day of March, 2026)

¶149

ANNEXURES

¶150

LIST OF DOCUMENTS PRODUCED BY THE APPLICANT

¶151

Sl. No.	Description of Documents		Documents No.
1.	Sale Notice issued by the respondent 08.02.2022.	dated	A-1
2.	Letter issued by the 1^strespondent 29.12.2022.	dated	A-2
3.	Certified Copy of Sale Certificate 18.11.2022.	dated	A-3

¶152

LIST OF DOCUMENTS PRODUCED BY THE 1^st RESPONDNET

¶153

Sl.	Description of Documents	Documents
No.		No.
1.	Sanction Letter for Rs.6 lakhs dated 23.08.2011.	R-1

SA No.619/2023

06.03.2026

2.	Sanction letter for Term Loan facility for amount of Rs.15 lakhs dated 16.09.2016.	R-2
3.	Sanction letter for Secured Term Loan facility for amount of Rs.15 lakhs vide for purchase of machinery dated 24.10.2019.	R-3
4.	Sanction Letter for Term Loan (GECL) facility for amount of Rs.4,72,000/-dated 29.09.2020.	R-4
5.	Demand Notice issued by the 1^stdefendant bank under Sec.13(2) of SARFAESI Act 2022 to Applicant and Mortgagor cum Guarantor for Term Loan facility for amount of Rs.15 Lakhs dated 17.06.2021.	R-5
6.	Demand Notice issued by the 1^stdefendant bank under Sec.13(2) of SARFAESI Act 2002 to Applicant, Guarantor and Mortgagor cum Guarantor for Term Loan Facility for amount of Rs.15 lakhs and Term Loan (GECL) facility for amount of Rs.4,72,000/-dated 17.06.2021.	R-6
7.	Acknowledged card dully signed by the applicants for having received by the demand notices dated 28.06.2021.	R-7
8.	Possession Notice issued by the 1^stdefendant bank to Applicant, Guarantor and Mortgagor cum Guarantor dated 08.09.2021.	R-8
9.	Acknowledged card for having received the Possession Notice send by the 1^stdefendant bank dated 13.09.2021.	R-9
10.	Photograph taken at the time of affixing the Possession notice dated 08.09.2021.	R-10
11.	Paper Publication of the Possession Notice made in the Tamil Daily “Dinakaran” dated 14.09.2021.	R-11
12.	Paper Publication of the Possession Notice made in the English Daily “Times of India” dated 14.09.2021.	R-12
13.	Sale Notice issued by the 1^stdefendant bank to applicant, guarantor and mortgagor cum guarantor dated 08.02.2022.	R-13
14.	Photograph taken at the time of affixing the Sale Notice dated 08.02.2022.	R-14
15.	Acknowledged card for having received the Sale Notice sent by the 1^stdefendant bank dated 11.02.2022.	R-15
16.	Paper publication of the sale notice made in the Tamil Daily“Dinathanthi”dated 10.02.2022.	R-16
17. 18.	Paper publication of the sale notice made in the English Daily“Times of India”dated 10.02.2022. Auction Proceedings dated 16.03.2022.	R-17 R-18

SA No.619/2023

06.03.2026

19.	Final order in SA.No.133 of 2021 (against PN dated 08.09.2021) dated 07.04.2022.	R-19
20.	Sale Concluded intimation letter sent by the 1^st defendant bank to applicant guarantor and mortgagor cum guarantor dated 30.04.2022.	R-20
21.	Acknowledged card for having received the sale concluded intimation letter send by the 1^st defendant bank dated 10.05.2022.	R-21
22.	Sale Certificate was registered (18.11.2022-P- 16) in favour of Mr. Riyas with SRO Pappireddypatti vide Doc.No.4783 of 2022 dated 19.05.2022 & 23.12.2022.	R-22
23.	Intimation Letters issued by the 1^stdefendant bank to mortgagor cum guarantor along with DD dated 06.07.2022.	R-23
24.	Acknowledged card for having received the intimation letters sent by the 1^stdefendant bank dated 07.07.2022.	R-24
25.	CERSAI REPORTS	R-25
26.	Memorandum of Deposit of Title Deeds, registered as Doc.No.3041/2011, with SRO Pappireddypatti dated 25.08.2011.	R-26
27.	Memorandum of Deposit of Title Deeds, registered as Doc.No.2589/2016, with SRO Pappireddypatti dated 16.09.2016.	R-27
28.	Supplemental Memorandum of Deposit of Title Deeds, registered as Doc.No.2888/2019, with SRO Pappireddypatti dated 24.10.2019.	R-28
29.	Memorandum of Deposit of Title Deeds, registered as Doc.No.2788/2020, with SRO Pappireddypatti dated 30.09.2020.	R-29
30.	Statement of Accounts for Account No.041700950100035 from 23.08.2011 to 30.04.2022.	R-30
31.	Statement of Accounts for Account No.041700460100190 from 16.09.2016 to 30.04.2022.	R-31
32.	Statement of Accounts for Account No.041700460100273 from 24.10.2019 to 30.04.2022.	R-32
33.	Statement of Accounts for Account No.041700460100342 from 29.09.2020 to 30.04.2022.	R-33
34.	Request Letter from Mortgagor Mr. Sagunthala and duly signed by the applicant dated 12.10.2022.	R-34

SA No.619/2023

06.03.2026

SCHEDULE OF PROPERTY

¶166

All that part and parcel of land to the extent of 1021.75 sq.ft., and Residential building constructed thereat situated at S.No.42/2, S.No.42/3, New Natham S.No.42/4Q, Old D.No.6, New D No.48, 4^th ward, 1 pillaiyar Kovil Street, B. Mallapuram Village, Pappireddipatti Taluk, Dharmapuri District, Dharmapuri Registration District, Pappireddipatti Sub Registrar Office.

¶167

Boundaries:

¶168

East of – House belonging to Elango

¶169

West of – Rajaveethi

¶170

South of – House belonging to Devaki

¶171

North of – House belonging to Vijayalakshmi & Bhuvaneswari

¶172

Measuring East to west on both sides 61 feet each and North to South on Eastern side 16 1/4 feet, on western side 17 1/4 feet.