Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
VIJU ABRAHAM
K.R. Ushasree W/o B. Mohanchandran Nair – Appellant
Versus
Indian Bank, Rep. by Branch Manager, Kollam Branch – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. auction process and sale details. (Para 1) |
| 2. claim for compensation due to possession issues. (Para 2) |
| 3. bank's obligation to deliver full possession. (Para 3 , 4) |
| 4. court analysis of bank's liability and legal precedents. (Para 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12) |
| 5. court's directive for payment and interest. (Para 13) |
JUDGMENT :
VIJU ABRAHAM, J.
W.P. (C) No. 41671 of 2022
1. It is averred that petitioner is the successful bidder in an auction conducted by the 2nd respondent invoking the provisions of Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (for short 'the SARFAESI Act') in respect of 3 Acres 20 cents of land and building situated therein comprised in old Survey Nos.9658, 9859, 9608 and 9614 of Kollam East Village (Re.Survey No.3 of block 68). The property was originally owned by one N.Sundareswaran, who availed financial assistance from the 1st respondent Bank mortgaging the above mentioned properties and when he committed default, the bank invoked the provisions of the SARFAESI Act and sold the properties in auction, after publishing notice for the proposed sale in Hindu and Mathrubhoomi daily dated 18.6.2008. The
Secured creditors must fully deliver the auctioned property and disclose material defects; failure to do so incurs liability for damages, including refunds with interest.
The bank retains the right to recover debts through mortgaged properties even if the borrower sells the property to a third party, as established under the SARFAESI Act, 2002.
Writ court directs SARFAESI auction sale registration despite delays, relegates possession and property disputes to civil court.
Seller is bound to disclose any buyer any material defect in property of which buyer is not aware and which buyer could not ordinarily discover.
Point of Law - It is therefore held that the secured creditor, after service of notice under Rule 8 of the Rules, 2002, is entitled to take symbolic possession of the secured assets so as to sale suc....
Burden was on the petitioner to establish, on the basis of firm pleadings and cogent evidence that the respondent-Bank had actively concealed or misrepresented any material fact from the petitioner w....
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
