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

2017 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 14

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Judge, J
Ambalavanan v. K. Kailasam and Another


Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Senior counsel
For the Respondents: Senior counsel

Table of Content
1. review application filed by auction purchaser regarding refund. (Para 1 , 2)
2. sale found to have violated statutory procedures. (Para 3 , 4 , 5)
3. entitlement to interests on refunded amounts discussed. (Para 6 , 7 , 8 , 9)
4. court directs bank to refund and pay interest. (Para 10 , 11)

1. This review application is filed by the auction purchaser to review the order dated 2 September 2015 in C.R.P.(NPD) No.2210 of 2015, primarily on the ground that while allowing the revision petition filed by the first respondent, direction was not issued to the Bank to refund the sale amount deposited by him along with the stamp duty and registration fee, with interest.

2. The first respondent availed financial assistance from the SAF Branch of Canara Bank, Coimbatore. Since the loan amount was not repaid as per schedule, the Bank initiated proceedings under the provisions of Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act , [hereinafter referred to as 'SARFAESI Act']. The first respondent challenged the measures taken by the Bank before the Debts Recovery Tribunal, Coimbatore. The order passed by the Debts Recovery Tribunal (herei

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 telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top