Debts Recovery Tribunals and Appellate Tribunals
UNION BANK OF INDIA vs SYNDICATE BANK AND ORS on 1 October 2026
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
**DEBTS RECOVERY APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI**
**Appeal No.474/2019 Arising out of O.A. No.432/2012 (DRT-III, Delhi)**
**Item No.8**
**Union Bank of India V. Canara Bank (Erstwhile Syndicate Bank) & others**
**& Misc. Application No.481/2019 In Appeal No.442/2016 Arising out of O.A. No.432/2012 (DRT-III, Delhi)**
**Item No.19**
**PNB Housing Finance Limited V. Syndicate Bank**
**01.10.2026 Hon'ble Dr. Justice Sudhir Kumar Jain**
**Present: Sh. U.N. Singh, Advocate for Union Bank of India through VC Sh. G.P.S. Verma, Advocate Canara Bank Sh. Prashant Tripathi, Advocate for PNB Housing Finance Limited**
**These matters are taken up through Hybrid hearing.**
**1.** In the present appeals the dispute is appearing to be among three banks and a financial institution, i.e. PNB Housing Finance Limited. Earlier Syndicate Bank was one of the parties but it is now represented by Canara Bank. The banks and financial institution were claiming to be secured creditors in respect of the property bearing no.93, Pocket-12, Sector-20, Rohini, Delhi and were claiming to be in possession of the title deeds through same borrowers. Syndicate Bank (now known as Canara Bank) filed O.A. wherein borrowers, PNB Housing Finance Limited and Union Bank of India were arrayed as defendants. The O.A. was allowed in favour of Syndicate Bank (now Canara Bank) vide order dated 07.09.2016 and held that Syndicate Bank (now Canara Bank) was having prior charge over PNB Housing Finance Limited and Union Bank of India. Union Bank of India was successful in auctioning the mortgaged property and realised an amount of Rs.26.51 lacs. The auction purchaser was one Madhu Jain. To impugn the order dated 07.09.2016, Appeal bearing No.442/2026 titled as **PNB Housing Finance Limited Vs. Syndicate Bank and others** and Appeal bearing no.443/2026 titled as **Union Bank of India Vs. Syndicate Bank & others** were filed. This Tribunal, vide order dated 19.09.2018 opined that the DRT did not resolve the controversy regarding the mortgage of the subject property on the basis of separate title documents, which should have been decided by the DRT. Thereafter, this Tribunal, vide order dated 19.09.2018 set aside the order dated 24.09.2016 to the extent that the charge of Syndicate Bank (now Canara Bank) was upheld. This Tribunal remanded the O.A. bearing no.432/2012 back to DRT with direction to decide about the genuineness of the title deeds claimed to be in possession of three banks and one financial institution. DRT was also given liberty to decide as to who is entitled to get the sale proceeds, i.e. Rs.26.51 lacs. Thereafter, the O.A. bearing no.432/2012 has been decided by DRT-II, Delhi vide order dated 01.01.2019 and held that Syndicate Bank (now Canara Bank) is entitled to the sale proceeds which was stated to have been received by Union Bank of India by auctioning the property in question. By the said order, DRT has also disposed of S.As. bearing no.487/2010 titled as **PNB Housing Finance V. Syndicate Bank & others**, 204/2012 titled as **South Indian Bank Limited V. Union Bank of India**. Being aggrieved, Union Bank of India filed the present appeal bearing no.474/2019 titled as **Union Bank of India V. Canara Bank & others**. PNB Housing Finance Limited has also filed an Application bearing no.481/2019 in Appeal No.442/2016 which are pending disposal before this Tribunal.
2. The respective counsels for the banks and financial institutions stated that the present dispute involves two banks and a financial institution and as per Section 11 of the SARFAESI Act, the present dispute is to be decided by conciliation or arbitration. The respective counsels also referred the decision of the Supreme Court in case titled as **Bank of India V. Sri Nangli Rice Mills Private Limited & others**, Civil Appeal 7110/2025 decided on 23.05.2025.
3. Accordingly, in view of Section 11 of the SARFAESI Act and the above-mentioned judgment delivered by the Supreme Court, the present appeal bearing no.474/2019 and Misc. Application no.481/2019 are disposed of with the direction to the banks and the financial institution to resolve their dispute regarding apportionment of the sale proceeds as well as genuineness of the title deeds on which they are claiming their right over the subject property through conciliation or arbitration.
4. Since Union Bank of India is appellant in Appeal No.474/2019 is directed to initiate appropriate legal proceedings for appointment of Arbitrator for the resolution of the dispute within 8 weeks from the date of uploading of this order on the website of this Tribunal. It is made clear that the impugned order dated 01.01.2019 shall not have any influence in the decision or award to be made by the proposed Arbitrator in accordance with law.
sd - ----- **(Dr. Justice Sudhir Kumar Jain)** **Chairperson**
-pk