Home Case Index All Cases Indian Laws Indian Laws + HC Indian Laws - 2018 (4) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2018 (4) TMI 717 - HC - Indian LawsE-auction - main contention of the writ petitioner is that Rules 8 and 9 of the Security Interest (Enforcement) Rules 2002 are mandatory and that in no circumstances, the same can be ignored - Held that: - Merely because the petitioner has committed default in payment and even taking it for granted that there was dilatory tactics, in repayment, and that the borrower has been litigating, by filing applications before the Tribunal, the same are not tenable grounds, to arrive at the conclusion that there was waiver of statutory provisions, by the borrower of the notice period of 30 days and that the said mandatory period of 30 days, can be ignored. Decision of Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal, Chennai is contrary to the well settled judicial pronouncements of the Hon'ble Supreme Court. Any of the measures referred to in sub-section (4) of Section 13, taken by the secured creditor are not in accordance with the provisions of this Act and the rules made thereunder, and require restoration of the management or restoration of possession, of the secured assets to the borrower or other aggrieved person. The interest of the auction purchaser also requires should be protected - Union Bank of India directed to refund the bid amount with 9% interest, to the auction purchaser, within thirty days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Compensation of ₹ 75,000/- awarded by the Debts Recovery Tribunal, is set aside. If the petitioner is dispossessed, auction purchaser and Union Bank of India, are directed to restore possession of the aforementioned property to the writ petitioner, within one month, from the date of receipt of a copy of this order - petition disposed off.
|