SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2008 Supreme(Mad) 368

High Court of Judicature at Madras
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.K. MISRA & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.K. SASIDHARAN
M/s. Hanu Reddy Realty India Pvt. Ltd., & Others
Versus
Jignesh & Others
C.R.P.NPD.No.518 of 2006 and C.R.P.PD.No.1842 of 2005 and W.P.No.536 of 2006 and C.M.P.Nos.3873 of 2006 & 20595 of 2005 & V.C.M.P.Nos.289 of 2006 & 296 of 2006 & W.P.M.P.No.619 of 2006
Decided On :Decided On : 04-02-2008

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioners:T.R. Rajagopalan, SC For T.V. Sekar, Advocate. For the Respondents:Sathish Parasaran, K.V. Babu, K. Sukumaran, K. Venkatasubramanian, S. Vasudevan, A. Jyothi Rani, Advocates.

High Court cannot interfere when conclusions arrived by sub-ordinate courts are not perverse or irrational.

Headnote:Constitution of India-Article 226, Recovery of Debts due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993-Scope of revision against order of Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal-Tribunal considered the issue on the basis of relevant materials-said decision can neither be termed as perverse nor unreasonable-no interference required.

       

Judgment :-

(K.K. Sasidharan, J.)

These civil revision petitions are directed against the order dated 01.12.2005 in M.A.No.124 of 2005, whereby the Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal modified the order dated 28.07.2005 in Appeal No.2/2005 on the file of the Debts Recovery Tribunal-I, Chennai, with respect to the property in item No.1 in the auction notice held on 18.11.2004 (C.R.P.No.1842 of 2005) and the order dated 20.02.2006 in I.N.No.315/2005 and I.A.No.91/2006, whereby the Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal directed to take steps to auction the property in item No.3 of the auction notice (C.R.P.No.518 of 2006).

2. W.P.No.536 of 2006 has been filed by the defaulter for issue of a Writ of Certiorari calling for the orders dated 28.07.2005 in Appeal No.2/2005 as well as the order dated 01.12.2005 in M.A.No.124 of 2005 which is the subject matter of C.R.P.No.1842 of 2005 and to quash the same.

3. For the purpose of appreciating the facts in all the three matters, the factual details as found in C.R.P.No.518 of 2006 is referred to here under:

The third respondent in C.R.P.No.518 of 2006, namely M/s.Global Trust Bank, Chennai filed O.A.No.1481 of 1998 before the Debts Recovery Tribunal-I, Chennai against the respondents 1 and 2 (hereinafter referred to as defaulters) for recovery of a sum of Rs.13,17,43,056.58 with future interest at the rate of 24% per annum and the said original application was allowed as per order dated 27.12.2002 and a recovery certificate for the said sum was issued by the Tribunal. In pursuance of the recovery certificate No.35/2003 issued by the Tribunal, three items of property were brought to sale and for better appreciation, the details of property offered for sale are scheduled here under:

"Item No.1:- Survey Nos.43/1,43/1A,43/1B Maduravoyal Village of an extent of 1.33 acres of the land and building situated at 307, Door No.165, Poonamallee High road, Aarthi Nagar, Maduravoyal, Chennai-102. (Known as Aarthi Towers)

UPSET PRICE: RS.6,00,00,000/- (Rupees six crores only)

Item No.2:- All that piece and parcel of land measuring 2560 sq.ft. built up area including common wall marked as Plot No.9, at premises No.19, Door No.36, (Block No.1), Vuppatur Avenue Off, Flower road, Old No.11, Kilpauk, Chennai.

UPSET PRICE: RS.49,00,000/- (Rupees forty nine lakhs only)

Item No.3:- Agricultural land admeasuring 21.09 acres or thereabouts in Chingleput Registration District and Walajabad Sub Registration District in No.149, Pappanguli Village in S.Nos.1,1(P), 2/1, 2/2A, 3/2A1, 3/2A2,3/28 (Part), 3/2B, 3/2C1, 3/2B(P), 3/3A, 11/2, 11/3, 12/1b1, 21, 22/2, 24/6b, 241, 256/5A, 256/5B & 256/6.

UPSET PRICE: RS.67,00,000/- (Rupees sixty seven lakhs only)"

4. The recovery certificate issued by the Debts Recovery Tribunal bearing No.35/2003 and the consequential order of attachment and proposed sale of property as published in Daily Thanthi dated 16.10.2004, fixing the auction on 18.11.2004 were challenged by the defaulter before the Debts Recovery Tribunal-I, Chennai in Appeal No.2 of 2005.

5. The Recovery Officer proposed to sell all the three items of property on 18.11.2004. However, item No.2 in the auction notice alone was sold on 18.11.2004. As there were no bidders in respect of item Nos.1 and 3, the sale was postponed to a subsequent date. However, no specific date was mentioned in the said proceeding. Subsequently, as per proceedings dated 01.12.2004, item Nos.1 and 3 were brought to sale on 15.12.2004 and on the said date, item No.1 in the auction notice measuring an extent of 1.33 acres situated at Maduravoyal Village in Chennai was sold. However, item No.3 was not sold on the said date and as per the proceedings of the Recovery Officer, in order to enable the petitioner to inspect the property and to verify the documents, the sale was postponed to 17.12.2004 at 04.30 p.m. The sale proceeding was taken upon on 17.12.2004 and the sale of item No.3 was made in favour of the petitioner for a sum of Rs.67,10,000/- and the purcha












































Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top