Debts Recovery Tribunals and Appellate Tribunals
Babu James vs UNION BANK OF INDIA on 11 September 2026
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
1
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.
IN THE DEBT RECOVERY APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AT CHENNAI
IA 872/2026 (Urgent) in IA 873/2026 (Waiver) in A.IR:1338/2026
Babu James & Anr V/S Union Bank of India & Anr 11/09/2026
Learned Counsel for both sides are present.This application is filed to hear the waiver application on an urgent basis.The other side has no serious objections to this urgent application.Therefore, IA No. 872 of 2026 (Urgent) is allowed.
IA 873/2026 (Waiver):
IA 872 of 2026 (Urgent) is allowed.
Learned Counsel for both sides are present.
Aggrieved against the final order dated 27.3.2026 passed by the Learned Presiding Officer, DRT-II, Kerala at Ernakulam in SA 354 of 2025, the Petitioners/Appellants before this Tribunal filed this appeal.
Learned Counsel for the Petitioners submitted that Petitioners availed three loans, namely,
a) Agricultural loan for Rs.80.00 lakhs
b) Housing loan to the tune of Rs.20.00 lakhs
c) Vehicle loan to the tune of Rs.6,50,000/-.
He further submitted that the vehicle loan has been closed. As per the orders of DRT-II, Kerala at Ernakulam, Petitioners made a payment of Rs.35.00 lakhs. The primary defense taken before this Tribunal by the Petitioners is that the land concerned in this case is an agricultural land and, therefore, proceedings under the SARFAESI Act, 2002 is barred under Section 31(i) of the SARFAESI Act, 2002. Petitioners are ready to settle the loan account, given sufficient time. The 2nd Petitioner is suffering from some nervous disorder, and that was the reason for not paying the loan amount. On these grounds, Learned Counsel for the Petitioners seeks waiver of pre-deposit. No other ground is urged for waiver of pre-deposit.
Answering these submissions, Learned Counsel for the Respondent Bank submitted that the loan availed is not an agricultural loan, but a commercial loan. Petitioners availed the loan for construction of a building in the same property which is claimed as an agricultural land.
Petitioners are also running a retail kerosene outlet in the said land. Therefore, the land cannot be considered as an agricultural land.
All these aspects had been considered by the Learned Presiding Officer, DRT-II, Kerala at Ernakulam and the Securitization Application was dismissed.
AS per the orders of DRT-II, Kerala at Ernakulam, the Petitioners made a payment of Rs.35.00 lakhs in three instalments at Rs.15.00 lakhs, Rs. 5.00 lakhs, and Rs.15.00 lakhs, respectively. The current outstanding on the date of filing this appeal stands at Rs.1,34,81,405.24p.
Considered the rival submissions and perused the records.
From the facts elicited above, it is reasoned that the primary objection of the Learned Counsel for the Petitioners against the proceedings under the SARFAESI Act, 2002 is that the land in question is an agricultural land. This aspect will be considered in the main appeal. Pre-deposit is mandatory for entertaining this appeal under Section 18(1) of the SARFAESI Act, 2002. It is the submission of the Learned Counsel for the Respondent Bank that after giving credit to all the payments made by the Petitioners, including Rs.35.00 lakhs paid, as directed by the lower Tribunal, the current outstanding on the date of filing this appeal is at Rs.1,34,81,504.24p. It is informed by the Learned Counsel for the Respondent Bank that the property is not sold in the SARFAESI sale so far.
Therefore, with a view to give an opportunity to the Petitioners to pay the loan amount and save the property, and taking into consideration the health issue of the 2nd Petitioner, this Tribunal is of the view that directing the Petitioners to make a pre-deposit of 25% of Rs.1,34,81,504.24p would meet the requirements of Section 18(1) of the SARFAESI Act, 2002.
The debt due is inclusive of interest as per the definition of debt under Section 2(1)(ha) of the SARFAESI Act, 2002, read with Section 2(g) of the RDB Act 1993, which had been settled by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in re, M/s. Sidha Neelkanth Paper Industries Private Limited & Another Vs. Prudent ARC Limited & Others (Civil Appeal No. 8969 of 2022, decided on 05.01.2023) reported in 2023 SCC Online SC 12.
In the said circumstances, this Tribunal directs the Petitioners to make a pre-deposit of 25% of Rs.1,34,81,504.24p in three equal instalments, within a period of six weeks from today, failing which this appeal would stand rejected.
25% of Rs.1,34,81,504.24p comes to Rs.33,70,376.06p, rounded off to Rs.33,70,376/-, out of which the first instalment of Rs.11,23,458.66p to be made on or before 25.9.2026, the second instalment of Rs.11,23,458.66p to be made on or before 9.10.2026, and the third instalment of Rs.11,23,458.66p on or before 23.10.2026.
The said pre-deposit should be made in the form of Demand Draft in favour of Registrar, DRAT, Chennai, payable at Chennai. In case pre-deposit is made within the stipulated period, Registrar shall invest the same in a Nationalized Bank for a reasonable period and renew it periodically, till further orders are passed.
Post the matter on 27.10.2026 for reporting compliance.
Sd/- Chairperson