VENKATESH ALIED SOLUTION CO vs BANK OF INDIA on 16 March 2021

JUDGMENT

1. This M.A. No.14/2017 is filed on 1st May, 2017 by the applicant for condonation of delay in challenging the sale certificate dated 15th March, 2017 issued by the Respondent No.1 excluding statutory period of 45 days permitting registration of Securitization Appeal calculated from the date of knowledge.

2. The applicant submits that he has filed Securitization Application under Section 17 of the SARFAESI Act for the major taken by the respondent No.1 in favour of the respondent No.2 on 1st May, 2017. It is submitted that the respondent no.1 has fixed the auction sale on 28th February, 2017 and the alleged sale has been confirmed on 15th March, 2017 but the finalizing of the same has not been communicated by the respondent No.1 to the applicant though the knowledge of sale notice is not denied.

3. It is further submitted by the applicant that he had already filed Securitization Application No.18/2017 in respect of taking symbolic possession. In the said S.A. No.18/2017 he has filed interim application for staying the further proceeding. The said interim application has been finally heard and decided by the Hon’ble In-charge DRT, Pune on 12th April, 2017. At the time of arguments, the counsel for the respondent-bank stated that the bank has already confirmed the sale and also handed over the possession but he has not submitted any record to that respect.

4. The applicant submits in the present Miscellaneous Application that the respondent no.1 has not informed about the confirmation of the sale and delivery of possession to the applicant therefore the applicant filed an application for getting the copy of the sale-certificate, possession receipt and name of the prospective purchaser. The respondent no.1 has issued a Xerox copy of the sale certificate on 24th April, 2017 to the applicant. The applicant submits that he has got knowledge about the confirmation of sale in favour of the respondent no.2 on 24th April, 2017. Immediately, the he has filed the securitization application on 1st May, 2017 for setting aside the same dated 15th March, 2017.

5. The applicant further submits that there is no delay for filing the securitization application as the applicant has got knowledge on 26th April, 2017 and he has filed the securitization application on 1st May, 2017. There is a Sunday on 30th April, 2017. From the date of measure i.e. 15th March, 2017 the present application is filed on 1st May, 2017 which is after one day. The application ought to have been filed on 29th April, 2017 but it was filed on 1st May, 2017 as there was Sunday on 30th April, 2017 therefore the delay is caused is of one day and it is so technical. It is submitted by the applicant that he has assumed that the sale should be challenged from the date of knowledge, if the said aspect is considered, there is no delay on the part of the applicant. The delay caused of one day is not deliberate or intentional.

6. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant submits that there is delay of 01 day in filing this Securitisation Application. The time expired on 29th April, 2017 and 30th April, 2017 being Sunday, this Securitisation Application was filed on 1st May, 2017. The plea taken by the applicant is that in another Securitisation Application No.18/2017 they came to know on 12th April, 2017 that the sale has been done and they have asked the bank to give the details of the same.

7. Lastly, the Applicant prayed for allowing his application and the delay of 01 days caused in filing the Securitisation Application be condoned in the interest of justice as the property of the applicant has been sold out by the respondent without following due procedure as per law and without informing the said fact to the applicant.

8. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent nos.1 & 3 submits that they have issued the sale notice in January which was duly served on them. The sale was confirmed on 8th March, 2017. The very interesting aspect which has been pointed out by the learned counsel for the respondent-bank is that the Demand Draft of Rs.6,25,000/- which was excess amount received in the sale was handed over to the borrower / applicant on 6th April, 2017 which was accepted by them. He prayed for dismissal of the application for condonation of delay filed by the applicant. The limitation to file Securtisation Application expired somewhere in the middle of March 2017 since date of auction was 8th March, 2017 and sale notice is issued much prior to it.

9. In these circumstances, this condonation of the delay application cannot be allowed and dismissed accordingly.

10. Considering the pleadings of the parties, documents and the oral submissions, I pass the following order:

ORDER

1. Miscellaneous Application No.14/2017 is dismissed.

2. No order as to costs.

(Vimal Gupta) Presiding Officer, Debts Recovery Tribunal, Aurangabad.