Back
GOPINATH P.
P. K. Jagdev, S/o. Kayath Premdev – Appellant
Versus
Indian Bank – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
1. The petitioner has approached this court challenging Ext.P3 order of the Debts Recovery Tribunal, Ernakulam, on T.S.A No.47/2016 arising out of S.A No.271/2008 filed before the Debts Recovery Tribunal, Chennai and also Exhibit P5 is the order of the Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal on R.A (SA) 182/2018 dismissing the appeal filed by the petitioner against Ext.P3 order.
The facts which are to be noticed for the adjudication of the issues arising for consideration may be briefly noticed:-
2. The petitioner is the grandson of the late N. Sundareswaran who was the Managing Partner of a registered partnership firm - namely M/s N.Sundareswaran (hereinafter referred to as ‘the firm’). The firm was engaged in the business of processing and exporting cashews and was enjoying credit facilities from the Indian Bank through its Kollam branch. Though the business of the partnership firm continued fairly successfully till the year 1980-81, it appears that the business of the firm ran into rough weather, leading to the mounting of liabilities with the Indian Bank. Considering the long banking relationship with the firm, the Indian Bank extended a 'revival and rehabilitation package' t
The petitioner had no standing to challenge the bank's actions under the SARFAESI Act, except in relation to the property obtained under the settlement deed.
The petitioner had no locus standi to challenge the proceedings initiated by the bank under the SARFAESI Act against the properties mortgaged to the bank and in respect of action initiated against th....
Sales executed after taking possession under the SARFAESI Act are void, affirming the authority of civil courts in possession disputes involving third parties.
Court held that transactions made during the subsistence of a mortgage are void under the SARFAESI Act; the auction purchaser's rights were upheld despite challenges to the validity of earlier transf....
Delay defeats equity and can render a petition unentertainable, especially in cases where the petitioner was aware of the proceedings but failed to act in a timely manner.
Compliance with statutory notice requirements is imperative in mortgage auctions; failures may invalidate the sale, preserving the mortgagor's right of redemption until formal sale registration.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that when an alternative remedy is available to challenge an order under the SARFAESI Act, the instant writ petition is not maintainable.
The court affirmed the validity of a mortgage auction, emphasizing banks' rights over secured properties despite challenges from subsequent purchasers and procedural compliance in auction processes.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
