Back
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
Dhiraj Singh Thakur, CJ, Ravi Cheemalapati, J
Dutta Umamaheswara Rao – Appellant
Versus
M/s. VST Constructions and others – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petition challenges auction validity. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. detailing loan defaults and bank's auction notice. (Para 4 , 6 , 10) |
| 3. arguments on notification lapses and borrower responsibilities. (Para 17 , 18 , 34) |
| 4. court’s clarification on statutory compliance for auctions. (Para 19 , 20 , 28) |
| 5. final ruling in favor of petitioner's assessment. (Para 36) |
DHIRAJ SINGH THAKUR, CJ:
The present writ petition has been filed challenging the order passed by the Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal, Kolkata, dated 12.08.2024, whereby the auction of the property by the respondent Canara Bank under the provisions of the SARFAESI Act made in favour of the auction purchaser from whom the petitioner had purchased the property subsequently was set aside on the ground that the sale conducted by the bank in the year, 2005, was in clear violation of Rule 8(6) as also the first proviso to Rule 9(1) of the Security Interest (Enforcement) Rules, 2002.
2. With a view to understand the background, in the light of which the present controversy has arisen, it is necessary to state briefly the material facts:
3. M/s. V.S.T.Constructions/respondent No.1 herein, availed a loan of Rs.10 lakhs in th
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
