Dr Uma Suresh Wo Late Mr Suresh vs The National Co Operative Bank Ltd on 12 August 2025

:ORDER:

1. This MA is filed by the applicant who succeeded in setting aside the measures taken by the 1st respondent bank. The SA was filed challenging the sale notice dated 21.02.2019 issued by the respondent bank wherein, this Tribunal vide order dated 27.05.2021 passed an order setting aside the measures leading to the issuance of certificate of sale dated 27.03.2019 registered as Document No.9533/2018-19 in favour of the 2nd and 3rd respondent and the directed to return the sale consideration paid by the successful bidders.

2. This present MA is filed with the following prayers:

a) Direct the respondent No.1 to execute the cancellation of certificate of sale issued in favour of the respondent No.2 and 3 with respect to the schedule property within 30 days from hereon;

b) Direct the respondent Nos.2 to 3 to co-operate with the respondent No.1 in executing the cancellation of sale by handing over all the original title deeds and other related documents of the schedule property within 10 days from hereon; 3 MA/38/2025

c) If the respondents fail to execute the cancellation of certificate of sale with respect to the schedule property within 30 days, appoint a court commissioner to execute the cancellation of sale with regard to schedule property in terms of Order dated 27.05.2021 passed by this hon’ble court in SA.No.306/2020.

d) To pass orders as deemed fit under the facts and circumstances of the case in the interest of justice.

3. It is stated by the petitioner that, against the Order in SA.No.306/2020 an Appeal is preferred before the Hon’ble Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal, Chennai which stood withdrawn by the bank. The appeal preferred by the auction purchasers were dismissed by the Hon’ble DRAT, Chennai thereby the order passed in SA.No.306/2020 has attained finality. It is the grievance of the petitioner that, the 1st respondent is not complying with the order passed by this Tribunal as concurred by the Hon’ble DRAT as no steps were initiated to cancel the certificate of sale issued in favour of 2nd and 3rd respondent. The notice was issued to the respondents pursuant to which the respondents were represented through their respective counsels.

4. The 1st and 2nd respondent had filed their objection contending that, as on the date of registration of the sale deed the 2nd and 3rd respondent has paid Rs.5,03,10,000/-, out of which 4 MA/38/2025

Rs.3,40,00,000/- was the financial assistance from respondent No.1. The balance money of Rs.1,63,10,000/- was paid by the auction purchasers. It is also stated, that 2nd and 3rd respondent they have submitted that a representation dated 18.07.2024, demanding return of the investments for the purchase of the subject property as mentioned above seeking 18% interest for the amount spent to cancel the sale deed dated 27.03.2019. It is also stated that, the 1st respondent may had intimated the auction purchasers namely the 2nd and 3rd respondent that they are ready to refund an amount of Rs.5,36,30,460/-. Thereafter, the auction purchasers had made a representation demanding 18% interest. It is contended that the in response to the said representation the 1st respondent had replied that, they have virtually agreed for waiver of interest on the loan, extended the auction purchaser for the purchase of the property. Hence, according to the 2nd and 3rd respondent, the bank had gone back from their undertaking and is still liable to pay Rs.2,41,19,277/- to the respondents.

5. It is also contended that the respondent No.1 is liable to compensate the respondent No. 2 and 3 as they have invested the money. It is also pointed out a Civil Suit was filed before the Commercial Court as OS.No.386/2025, wherein the bank had already entered appearance. Hence, on the base of the above the 5 MA/38/2025

2nd and 3rd respondent contends that, respondent No.1 has not refunded the investment of the respondent No.2 and 3 and till such amounts are refunded the respondent No.2 and 3 cannot compel to cancel the sale and surrender the documents.

6. Heard the counsel for all the parties.

7. The facts as stated by the petitioner is not in dispute. It is admitted by both the parties that, the Order in SA.No.306/2020 dated 27.05.2021 has become final as the same had been confirmed by the Hon’ble DRAT in an Appeal preferred by the auction purchasers. The prayer of the applicant has to be looked into in the light of above admitted facts and that by the order dated 27.05.2021 the SA was allowed setting aside the entire measures leading to the conduct of sale and issuance of sale certificate. Hence, it is obligatory on the part of the first respondent to take the steps to get the sale certificate cancelled and to refund the amount to the auction purchasers as directed therein. The applicant is well justified in his grievance that, despite having succeeded in S.17 application and getting to set aside the measures, the inaction from the bank prevents the applicant from getting back his secured asset. No one has a case that, the bank had re-initiated the measures and sold the property again.

6 MA/38/2025

8. In the above premises, this Tribunal is of the view that, inter se dispute between the 1st respondent and 2, 3 respondents will not stand in way of the petitioner seeking the relief as sought for in the MA as the measures leading to the sale and consequential sale certificate are already set aside in the Order in SA.No.306/2020. In view of the above the 1st respondent is directed to execute the cancellation certificate of the sale issued in favour of the respondent No.2 and 3 as expeditiously as possible. Even, though no relief could be granted in favour of 2nd and 3rd respondent, this Tribunal feels that, in view of the specific direction in SA.No.306/2020 a direction can be issued to the 1st respondent to forthwith the refund the amount to respondent No.2 and 3 are entitle to as per the order dated 27.05.2021.

9. In the result, the MA stands disposed off as above. No orders as to costs. (Dictated to the Stenographer (PR), after her transcription and necessary corrections, signed and Order passed on this 12th day of August 2025)

Sd/- (T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER

DRT-II, BENGALURU