State Bank Of India vs KDP Infrastructure

This matter is taken up through Hybrid hearing.

Issue notice. Sh. Anand Aggarwal, Advocate appeared and accepted notice on behalf of respondents. With the consent of the parties, the present appeal is taken up for final disposal. I.A. No. 88/2026 (Application for condonation of delay)

The instant application is filed to condone the delay in filing the present appeal which is stated to be 3 days.

Due to the reason as stated in the application, the delay of 3 days in filing the present appeal is condoned. The present application is, accordingly, allowed.

The respondents filed S.A. bearing No. 240/2025 which is stated to be pending before DRT-II, Delhi. The respondents filed an application bearing I.A. No. 2939/2025 to challenge the SARFAESI action stated to have been initiated by appellant including the notice issued by the Court Receiver for taking the possession of the subject property on 27.10.2025. DRT-II, Delhi vide impugned order dated 24.10.2025 has allowed the interim prayer and restrained the appellant from taking possession of the subject property i.e. two flats being nos. 1105 and 1106, 11th Floor, Tower K, Grand Savana, Raj Nagar Extension, NH 58, Village Noor Nagar, Pargana Loni, Tehsil & District Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh-201001 till further order of this Tribunal.

The Advocate for the appellant stated that the subject property was allotted to Asha Rani Goel who has taken financial assistance from the appellant but could not stick to the financial discipline for repayment of the loan amount. The appellant has issued a letter to the respondent no.1 to cancel the allotment and the amount paid by the borrower to the builder be returned back to the appellant as per Tripartite Agreement.

DRT-II, Delhi in the impugned order observed that the appellant itself has written a letter to the respondent no.1/ builder to cancel the Flat allotted in favour of Asha Rani Goel and said flat was sold to the third party. DRT-II, Delhi also observed that the appellant itself has released the secured assets and therefore appellant cannot proceed against the flat. It was also appeared that the appellant can recover from the builder i.e. respondent no.1 as per provision contained in Tripartite Agreement. DRT-II, Delhi also observed that all the contentions of the appellant can be considered at the time of final disposal of S.A. bearing No. 240/2025.

This Tribunal is of the opinion that once the appellant itself has written to the builder i.e. respondent no.1 to cancel the flat allotted in favour of Asha Rani Goel i.e. borrower then the appellant cannot be allowed to proceed against the said flat. DRT-II, Delhi has rightly observed that all the contention of the appellant can only be considered at the time of final disposal of S.A. bearing No. 240/2025. There is no infirmity or illegality in the impugned order dated 24.10.2025 which warrants any interference of this Tribunal. Hence, appeal is dismissed. However, considering the peculiarity of the facts and circumstances, DRT-II, Delhi is directed to dispose of the S.A. bearing No.240/2025 preferably within six months from the date of receipt of this order.