S.MANIKUMAR, V.BHAVANI SUBBAROYAN
Canara Bank, Rep. by its Authorised Officer, Chennai – Appellant
Versus
Presiding Officer, Debts Recovery Tribunal III, Chennai – Respondent
S. MANIKUMAR, J.
1. As no adverse order is passed against the respondents, notice is waived.
2. M/s. Esjaypee Impex Private Limited, has taken credit facility to an aggregate limit of Rs. 39.50 Crores, from Canara Bank, Chennai. Mrs. Madhubala Parmar, wife of Mr. Mahendra Kumar Parmar, one of the Directors also stood as guarantor and offered a property viz. land and building bearing Old No. 23, New No. 2, Ormes Road, Rajarathinam Street, Kilpauk, Chennai-600 010, as security. There were three other Directors.
3. Borrowers/guarantors defaulted and after classifying the loan as non performing asset. As there was an outstanding amount of Rs. 36,87,68,598.16p, as against the sanctioned limit of Rs. 46 Crores, possession notice dated 19.04.2017 was issued under Section 13(4) of the SARFAESI Act, 2002. Said possession notice came to be challenged in S.A. No. 126 of 2017, on the file of Debts Recovery Tribunal-II, Chennai and vide order dated 20.07.2017, Debts Recovery Tribunal-II, Chennai, granted status quo on condition that the respondents 1 and 2 should pay 20% of the amount due on or before 21.08.2017. Debts Recovery Tribunal-II, Chennai directed S.A. No. 126 of 2017 be called on
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.