AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
This matter is taken up through Hybrid hearing.
The appellants filed S.A. bearing No.190/2025 titled as Kavita Ghai and another V. Bank of India which is stated to be pending before DRT-I, Delhi.
The appellants filed application bearing I.A. No.1355/2026 for restraining the respondent/court receiver from taking physical possession of the subject property bearing flat no.711(without roof rights), Type-1, 7TH floor, Tower-H, Oxy Homez, New Dilshad Extension, New Koyal Enclave, New Loni Bhopura Road, Tilla More Road, Ghaziabad, UP. The application bearing I.A. No.1355/2026 was ordered to be dismissed vide impugned order dated 29.06.2026. The relevant portion of the order dated 29.06.2026 is reproduced as under:
5.In the present matter, admittedly the applicant being borrower has availed the loan facilities from respondent bank against the mortgage of the property in question. Apparently, there is default on the part of the borrower in paying the dues of the respondent bank and as per respondent bank that after declaring the account as NPA the borrower has not paid the dues of the respondent bank and the demand notice under Section 13(2), symbolic possession notice under Section 13(4) of the SARFAESI Act, 2002 and the sale notice have already been served upon the borrower/guarantor/mortgagor as per the Security Interest (Enforcement) Rules, 2002. Even otherwise, the respondent bank cannot be regularized the account on depositing the overdue amount after auctioning the property in question, which is against the Section 13(8) of the SARFAESI Act, 2002.
6.In the light above facts and circumstances of the case, this Tribunal is of the prima facie view that there is prima facie no illegality or irregularity in the measures taken by the respondent bank under the SARFAESI Act including notices under Section 13(2) and 13(4) and even the applicant has also not denied about the availment of the loan facilities by the borrower and creation of mortgage in favour of the respondent bank. Accordingly, the prayer of the applicant for restraining the respondent bank/court receiver from taking physical possession of the property in question, which is fixed for 30.06.2026, stands rejected. All other issues shall be decided at the time of final hearing after filing the reply, rejoinder and evidences by the parties.
The appellant being aggrieved filed the present appeal. Sh. Sanjeev Kumar Awana, Advocate for the appellant argued that two notices under Section 13(2) and Section 13(4) of the SARFAESI Act were issued by the respondent wherein the different outstanding dues are mentioned. It is further argued that the respondent has never informed about the outstanding dues and the appellants are ready and willing to pay the outstanding dues to the respondent.
Sh. Akshay Uppal, Advocate for the respondent stated that the subject property has already been put to auction in pursuance of sale notice and thereafter, the sale confirmation has already been issued in favour of the auction purchaser. In these circumstances, he stated that the present appeal is liable to be dismissed.
Admitted that the appellants are the borrowers and the subject property was mortgaged to the respondent and there was also default in payment of loan account. The auction has already been conducted and sale confirmation is already issued in favour of the auction purchaser. DRT-I, Delhi in the impugned order dated 29.06.2026 has already considered all the necessary legal issues and passed a well-reasoned order.
There is no illegality or infirmity in the impugned order which requires any interference by this Tribunal. The arguments advanced by the counsel for the appellants are not providing any help to the counsel for the appellant.
Accordingly, the present appeal is dismissed being devoid of any merit.
The date of 22.07.2026 already fixed stands cancelled.