Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
P. Dhanabal, J
A.RAJA – Appellant
Versus
INDIAN BANK – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. plaintiff's failed auction purchase and payments detailed (Para 1 , 2 , 10) |
| 2. defendant's forfeiture under sarfaesi rule 9(5) (Para 3 , 11) |
| 3. procedural history and factual admissions reviewed (Para 4 , 5 , 8 , 9 , 12) |
| 4. parties' contentions on forfeiture and estoppel (Para 6 , 7) |
| 5. sarfaesi rule 9(5) mandates 25% forfeiture irrespective of loss (Para 13) |
| 6. suit dismissed; no relief to plaintiff (Para 14 , 15) |
JUDGMENT
1.This Suit has been filed by the Plaintiff for the relief of recovery of money to the tune of Rs.1,59,77,500/- with interest @ 24% per annum and for costs.
2. The brief averments of the Plaint and reply Statement are as follows:-
The defendant is the bank, which lent loan to one M/s. Arun Agencies and the property in Plot No.45 and 46 measuring 49.412 cents in Old No.128/2 part, 128/3 part, Patta No.396, New S. No.128/2A1C and 128/2A1D of Kazhipattur Village, Kanchceepuram District now Chengalpattu District with a building admeasuring about 3500 sq. ft. belonged to M/s. Arun Agencies and two others has been mortgaged for the loan. The said loan availed by the borrower M/s. Arun Agencies has become ‘Non-Performing Asset [NPA]’ and thereby, the bank ini
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
