Appeal Sr. No. 324 of 2015. Case: Manoj Kumar Pandey and Ors. Vs Bank of Baroda and Ors.. Allahabad DRAT DRAT (Allahabad Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunals)

Case NumberAppeal Sr. No. 324 of 2015
CounselFor Appellant: S.K. Pandey, Advocate and Party-in-Person and For Respondents: Maneesh Mehrotra, Advocate
JudgesV.K. Mathur, J. (Chairperson)
IssueConstitution Of India - Article 226; Securitisation And Reconstruction Of Financial Assets And Enforcement Of Security Interest Act, 2002 - Sections 13(2), 13(4), 13(8), 17(1), 18
Judgement DateApril 12, 2016
CourtAllahabad DRAT DRAT (Allahabad Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunals)

Judgment:

V.K. Mathur, J. (Chairperson)

  1. The present Appeal has been preferred by the appellants under Section 18 of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (hereinafter referred to as the 'SARFAESI Act') against the order dated 2nd November, 2015 passed by the learned DRT, Allahabad in S.A. No. 409/2014, by which the securitization application of the appellants challenging the auction sale was dismissed. The brief facts of the present case are that the appellants are the borrowers and mortgagers who had taken the housing loan from the respondent-Bank. The respondent-Bank sanctioned the loan of Rs. 10.00 lacs to the appellants. The appellants failed to repay the instalments regularly to the respondent-Bank, therefore, the respondent-Bank issued a notice dated 20th May, 2011 under Section 13(2) of the SARFAESI Act demanding a sum of Rs. 11,96,260/- including interest upto 31st March, 2011.

  2. It is further stated that, since the appellants did not regularize their account, therefore, the respondent-Bank initiated the recovery proceedings against the appellants by taking recourse to Section 13(4) of the SARFAESI Act. The possession notice was issued by the respondent-Bank on 25th August, 2011. It was averred that the appellants challenged the entire proceedings for recovery before the DRT by means of S.A. No. 63 of 2013 which was disposed by the Tribunal below vide order dated 25th October, 2013. It was stated by the appellants that after issuance of demand notice substantial amount on various dates was deposited by the appellants.

  3. It was further submitted by the appellants that the respondent-Bank issued the second possession notice on 30th October, 2013 for a sum of Rs. 6,74,026/- plus interest as on 30th October, 2013. The appellants preferred a writ petition No. 68377/2013 before the Hon'ble High Court, Allahabad which was disposed of vide order dated 13th December, 2013 directing the appellants to pay the dues of the Bank in 8 equal quarterly instalments. It was further averred that since the appellants did not pay the amount as ordered by the Hon'ble High Court, the respondent-Bank proceeded for sale of the property in question vide auction sale notice dated 29th June, 2014 against which the appellants preferred the securitization application No. 276 of 2014 which was decided by the Tribunal below vide order dated 19th August, 2014 in favour of the appellants.

  4. The appellants further stated that the respondent-Bank again issued sale notice on 9th October, 2014 scheduling the auction of the property in question on 20th November, 2014 which was published in two newspapers and accordingly, the property in question was auctioned. The appellants preferred the S.A. No. 409 of 2014 on 25th November, 2014 before the Tribunal below which was dismissed vide the impugned order dated 2nd November, 2015. Being aggrieved by the impugned order dated 2nd November, 2015, the appellants preferred the present Appeal before this Tribunal under Section 18 of the SARFAESI Act.

  5. The learned Counsel...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT