Debts Recovery Tribunals and Appellate Tribunals
MR SHAHUL HAMED BADHUSHA vs GRIHUM HOUSING FINANCE LIMITED on 27 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.
IN THE DEBT RECOVERY APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AT CHENNAI
IA1594/2026 (Urgent) In IA 1595/2026 (Waiver) In AIR (SA) 3042/2026
Shahul Hamed Badhusha V/S Grihum Housing Finance Ltd
27/10/2026
Learned Counsel for both sides are present.
This application is filed for hearing the waiver application IA 1595 of 2026 on an urgent basis.
The other side has no serious objection to this urgent application.
Therefore, IA 1594 of 2026 (Urgent) is allowed.
IA 1595/2026 (Waiver)
IA 1594 of 2026 (Urgent) is allowed.
This matter is listed before the Learned Registrar, DRAT, Chennai. On the mentioning of the Petitioner/Appellant that the Respondent Financial Institution is trying to take physical possession of the secured asset today, this Tribunal directed that this matter to be placed before this Tribunal today, and accordingly taken up.
Learned Counsel for both sides are present.
This appeal is filed against the order passed in IA No. 2388 of 2026 filed for staying further proceedings in SA No. 706 of 2026.
SA No. 706 of 2026 has been filed to set aside the measures taken by the Respondent Financial Institution under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act, 2002 in orders obtained in Crl. M.P. No.7186 of 2026 on 7.9.2026 passed by the Learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Egmore, Chennai as erroneous, illegal and void.
It is the submission of the Learned Counsel for Petitioner that Petitioner was not served with the demand notice and possession notice issued under Section 13(2), and Section 13(4), respectively, of the SARFAESI Act, 2002.
When it was pointed out to the Learned Presiding Officer, DRT-III, Chennai, Learned Presiding Officer, DRT-III, Chennai observed that “the contention taken by the applicant is Section 13(2) notice and Section 13(4) notice are not served which is contradict to the recording of the pleadings in the Section 14 order. Applicant has not made out a case, hence, IA No.2388/2026 for stay stands dismissed.”.
It is further submitted by the Learned Counsel for the Petitioner that the order dismissing IA 2338 of 2026 is not a speaking order. This order has not considered the case of the Petitioner but was passed only on the basis of recording of pleadings in the Section 14 order. Therefore, this appeal is filed.
Mr. M. Karthikeyan, Learned Counsel representing the Learned Counsel on record for the Respondent Financial Institution is present and requested that the matter may be passed over for the Learned Counsel on Record to come and argue. When queried, it is informed that physical possession of the secured asset is not taken as at 12:12 pm today. Therefore, Learned Representing Counsel was directed to inform the Respondent Financial Institution not to proceed with taking physical possession till the disposal of the waiver application, and the matter was passed over for the appearance of the Learned Counsel on record for the Respondent Financial Institution.
When the court resumed after the pass over, Learned Counsel for the Respondent Financial Institution appeared through Video Conferencing and submitted that he wants to file counter in the waiver application.
In view of the details narrated above, the Respondent Financial Institution is directed not to proceed to take physical possession of the secured asset till the disposal of the waiver application.
Post the matter on 29.10.2026.
Sd/-
Chairperson