Dismissed

Mangilal Chowdhry Harjiram v. Cholamandalam Investment Finance Company Limiited

DRT21 Jul 2026SA/731/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debt Recovery Tribunal disposed of the Securitization Application filed by the borrower challenging a Section 14 order impeding debt recovery. The court held the application infructuous because the bank had completed the auction sale and issued a certificate, rendering the relief sought unnecessary.

What did the court decide?

Securitization Application disposed of as infructuous. Interim order granted, if any, vacated. No order as to cost.

Mangilal Chowdhry Harjiram versus Cholamandalam Investment… — Company and Corporate | DRT (2026)

SA No.731/2024

21.07.2026

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHENNAI

¶5

Dated this the 21^st day of July, 2026

¶6

Present: SMT. S.V. GOWRAMMA Presiding Officer

¶7

SARFAESI APPLICATION No. 731 of 2024

¶8

Mangilal Chowdhry Harjiram No.5/2 HIG H1, TNHB Colony, SRM College, Kanchipuram, Tamil Nadu-600 089. ….Applicant -Vs-

¶9

The Authorized Officer Cholamandalam Investment and Finance Company Limited ASV Adarsh Tower, 719, Pathari Road, Off, Anna Salai, Chennai-600 002. ….Respondent

¶10

Counsels on record / appeared:

¶11

Counsel for Applicant : M/s. M. Arun Murugan & R.T. Vijayaraaghavan. Counsel for respondent : M/s. Kishore Balasubramanian Anandhi B.

¶12

ORDER ON SA 731/2024

¶13

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

¶14

The applicant has challenged the Sec.14 order dated 25.09.2024 in Crl.M.P. No.5969 of 2024 passed by Chief Judicial Magistrate, Tiruvallur and the outstanding amount due as per Sec.14 order is Rs.69,95,708/-

¶15

Uploaded on 21.07.2026 at 2.15PM

SA No.731/2024

21.07.2026

The applicant is the borrower who has filed the present SA Challenging the Sec.14 order contending that applicant had availed loan facilities from the respondent bank, which were secured by creation of equitable mortgage of property vide Memorandum of Deposit of Title Deeds dated 05.01.2018, registered as Doc.No.44/2018 in the office of the Sub Registration District of Joint-II, Saidapet and Registration District of Chennai-South. The equitable mortgage is registered before the Central Registry dated 01.02.2018, and the respondent bank had filed CERSAI report duly evidencing registration of the security interest with the central registry which is produced at Pg.196-201 of counter.

¶20

3.1 In fact the applicants do not dispute the availing of the credit facility and mortgage of the property including the default in the repayment. Due to continuous default in the repayment, the loan account of the applicants was classified as NPA on 06.07.2023 in accordance with RBI guidelines.

¶21

3.2 The bank has issued S.13(2) Demand Notice dated 11.07.2023 claiming an amount of Rs.69,95,708/- due as on 11.07.2023 along with other charges. The Demand Notice is sent by RPAD which the borrowers have received the Demand Notice as per the tracking consignment produced at Pg.145-148 of counter. The Demand Notice is published in two newspapers one in English “The New Indian Express” and another one in Tamil “Dinamani” both dated 26.07.2023 and the Demand Notice is affixed on the conspicuous place of the property as per the photograph of affixture produced at Page No.151 and 155 of respondent bank’s typed set.

¶22

Uploaded on 21.07.2026 at 2.15PM

SA No.731/2024

21.07.2026

3.3 In spite of receipt of Sec.13(2) demand notice as the borrowers and the guarantors did not liquate the liability within 60 days and nor raised any objections to the demand made, the respondent bank has proceeded further under the Act.

¶27

3.4 The respondent issued the Sec.13(4) Possession Notice on 17.10.2023 sent through Registered Post with Acknowledgment, which the borrowers have received the Possession Notice as per the tracking consignment produced at Pg.158-165 of counter. The Possession Notice is published in two newspapers one in English “The New Indian Express” and another one in Tamil “Dinamani” both dated 19.10.2023 and the Possession Notice is affixed on the conspicuous place of the property as per the photograph of affixture produced at Page No.168 and 171 of respondent bank’s typed set.

¶28

3.5 The applicants even after the receipt of the statutory notices have failed to discharge their entire liabilities nor made any representation. Hence, the respondent bank has proceeded to issue the first sale notice on 16.11.2023. Thereafter, subsequent sale notices were issued on 15.02.2024, 16.05.2024 and 10.09.2024. The applicant approached the respondent and sought time for repayment of the outstanding loan amounts. Hence, sufficient time and opportunity was granted by the respondent for repayment of loan by cancelling the sale.

¶29

3.6 As the payments were not forthcoming, the respondent bank proceeded to issue a sale notice dated 10.09.2024, fixing the date of sale

¶30

Uploaded on 21.07.2026 at 2.15PM

SA No.731/2024

21.07.2026

as on 30.09.2024. The sale notice is sent by RPAD which the borrowers have received the same as per the tracking consignment produced at Pg.182-186 of counter, The Sale Notice is published in two newspapers one in English “The New Indian Express” and another one in Tamil “Dinamani” both dated 11.09.2024 and the Sale Notice is affixed on the property as per the photograph of affixture produced at Page No.189-193 of respondent bank’s typed set.

¶35

3.7 The auction sale was duly conducted and the schedule property was sold at a price of Rs.87,87,000/- and sale certificate was also duly issued in favour of the auction purchaser on 14.10.2024. The records reflects that the bank has sold the property and sale certificate is issued on 14.10.2024 which is produced at Page No.194 and 195 of counter.

¶36

3.8 The contention of the applicant is that the Demand Notice was not served and Possession Notice was also not served upon the applicant. The respondent Bank has filed its counter along with supporting documents establishing that the notice under Section 13(2) Demand Notice was duly served and that the notice under Section 13(4) Possession Notice were also duly served.

¶37

3.9 It is seen from the records that the bank has taken the physical possession of the property on 12.02.2025. Subsequently applicant has filed IA.No.84/2025 to implead the auction purchasers as 2^nd and 3^rd respondents in SA.731.2024, who is not a necessary party to the Sec.14 application and the prayer in the SA is set aside the sec.14 order which has

¶38

Uploaded on 21.07.2026 at 2.15PM

SA No.731/2024

21.07.2026

been rendered infructuous, nothing survives for further adjudication and the other challenges to the measures is not within the period of 45 days as

¶43

required under S.17 of the Act.

¶44

3.10 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. Sd/-

¶45

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

¶46

( Dictated to Steno (Suriya), transcribed by him, corrected, signed and pronounced by me on this the 21^st day of July, 2026)

¶47

ANNEXURES

¶48

LIST OF DOCUMENTS PRODUCED BY THE APPLICANT

¶49

Sl.	Description of Documents	Documents
No.		No.
1.	Impugned Order of CJM in Crl.MP.No.5969/2024	A-1
	Tiruvallur dated 25.09.2024.

¶50

LIST OF DOCUMENTS PRODUCED BY THE RESPONDNET

¶51

Sl. No.	Description of Documents	Documents No.
1.	Sanction Letter and Loan Agreement (Colly.) dated 30.11.2018, 30.12.2017 and 06.10.2020.	R-1
2.	Memorandum of Deposit of Title deeds (Colly.) dated 05.01.2018.	R-2
3.	Demand Notice issued under Sec.13(2) of the SARFAESI Act, along with the proof of dispatch and delivery dated 11.07.2023.	R-3
4.	Paper publication of the demand notice as well as proof of affixture dated 26.07.2023.	R-4
5.	Possession Notice issued under Sec.13(4) of the SARFAESI Act, along with the proof of dispatch and delivery dated 17.10.2023.	R-5
6.	Paper publication of the issued possession notice and proof of affixture of the said notice dated 19.10.2023.	R-6
7.	Letter issued by the applicant dated 05.06.2024.	R-7

¶52

Uploaded on 21.07.2026 at 2.15PM

SA No.731/2024

21.07.2026

8.	E-Auction sale notice issued under the SARFAESI Act, along with the proof of dispatch and delivery dated 10.09.2024.	R-8
9.	Paper publication of the Sale Notice as well as proof of affixture of the said notice dated 11.09.2024.	R-9
10.	Sale Certificate issued in favour of auction purchaser dated 14.10.2024.	R-10
11.	CERSAI Registration dated 01.02.2018.	R-11

¶57

SCHEDULE OF PROPERTY

¶58

All that piece and parcel of land measuring 1000 Sqft, with building thereon in the sanctioned plan of Ramapuram housing scheme, bearing HIG House No. H-1 (Southern Portion), Easwaran Nagar, Ramapuram, TNHB Colony, Chennai - 600 089, Comprised in Old Survey No. 136/1 Part, Patta No.5950, As per Patta New Survey No. 136/1A1A1A2B of Ramapuram Village, Maduravoyal Taluk, Thiruvallur District and Bounded on the: North By; Northern portion of HIG House No.M-1, South By: Land in Survey No. 139 & Road, East By: HIG House No.H-14, West By: Road, Measuring: North to South on the Eastern Side: 20 Feet - 0 Inches, North to South on the Western Side: 25 Feet -10.5 Inches, East to west on the Northern Side: 47 Feet - 7.5 Inches, East to West on the Southern Side: 41 Feet- 0 Inches. Situate within the Sub-Registration District of Joint-II, Saidapet and Registration District of Chennai-South.

¶59

Sd/-

¶60

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

¶61

Uploaded on 21.07.2026 at 2.15PM

Mangilal Chowdhry Harjiram v. Cholamandalam Investment Finance Company Limiited

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mangilal Chowdhry Harjiram v. Cholamandalam Investment Finance Company Limiited

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

Similar cases

Duraiswamy D versus Iifl Home Finance Limited

State Bank of India versus Rajeshwari

Bank of Baroda versus Sidedish Zone Private Ltd.

Sanjana Metalware India Pvt. Ltd. versus Deustche Bank

P Venkatesan versus Indian Bank

State Bank of India versus Abinaya Traders