Back
DEBT RECOVERY APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
Mr. Justice Anil Kumar Srivastava, CJ
State Bank of India, Stressed Assets Recovery Branch, Madhupatna, Cuttack – Appellant
Versus
Gayatri Devi Agarwal, Jiwan Kumar Agarwal, M/s Radha Kishan Jiwan Kumar – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. final decision of the appeal. (Para 1) |
| 2. facts of the case regarding the mortgage. (Para 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 3. court's observations on mortgage permissions. (Para 7 , 11 , 16) |
| 4. arguments regarding the validity of the mortgage. (Para 8 , 9 , 10 , 13 , 14) |
| 5. court's reasoning for allowing the appeal. (Para 17) |
JUDGMENT : 17th July, 2025
THE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL :
Instant Appeal has arisen against a judgment and order dated 10th October, 2018 passed by Learned DRT Cuttack allowing S.A. No. 36 of 2016 (Smt. Gayatri Devi Agarwal and others versus State Bank of India and others).
2. As per pleadings of the parties, brief facts of the cases are that a Securitisation Application under Section 17(1) of Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) was filed by the Respondents herein before the Learned DRT stating that Respondent No. 1, Smt. Gayatri Devi Agarwal was allotted a plot at C.D.A. Cuttack for construction of a residential house. The house was constructed and she is living in the house.
3. Lease was in respect of a plot with a condition regarding prohibition to mortgage, sub-leas
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
