M. Jobin vs BANK OF BARODA on 28 October 2026

IN THE DEBT RECOVERY APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AT CHENNAI

IA 1610/2026 (Urgent) In IA 1611/2026 (Waiver) In AIR (SA) 2932/2026

Jobin V/S The AO, Bank of Baroda & Anr

28/10/2026

Learned Counsel for both sides are present.

This application is filed to hear the waiver application IA 1611 of 2026 on an urgent basis.

The other side has no serious objection to this urgent application.

Therefore, urgent application IA 1610 of 2026 is allowed.

IA 1611/2026 (Waiver)

IA 1610 of 2026 (Urgent) is allowed.

This appeal is filed against order dated 6.10.2026 passed by the Learned Presiding Officer, DRT-III, Chennai in IA No. 2335 of 2026 in SA No. 685 of 2026.

SA No. 685 of 2026 has been filed to set aside the sale held on 19.8.2026 in pursuance of the sale notice dated 31.7.2026.

It is the submission of the Learned Counsel for Petitioner/Appellant that Petitioner is the rightful owner of the secured asset sold in favour of the 2 nd Respondent. The Petitioner is neither a borrower nor a guarantor. The 2 nd Respondent has not paid the sale consideration as per the sale deed. Therefore, Petitioner filed a suit in OS No.2433 of 2026 on the file of the Hon’ble District Court, Chengalpattu for declaration to cancel the sale deed and for other reliefs, for the reasons stated in the Plaint. Petitioner is not served with the sale notice. Sale notice is not affixed on the secured asset. The property worth Rs.1.00 crore was sold only for Rs.71.75 lakhs. The loan amount was only Rs.40.00 lakhs. On these grounds, Learned Counsel for Petitioner seeks waiver of pre-deposit. No other ground is urged in support of waiver of pre-deposit.

In response, Learned Counsel for R1 Respondent Bank submitted that the Petitioner had earlier filed SA No. 444 of 2026 challenging the sale notice and that has been dismissed as infructuous since no sale had happened. Petitioner also filed SA 555 of 2026 challenging the Section 14 order.

Learned Presiding Officer, DRT, Madurai dismissed the Securitization Application giving the reason that after being ousted of the title, the Petitioner could not maintain the application under Section 17 of the SARFAESI Act, 2002 and, thus, dismissed the Securitization Application as non-maintainable. However, the order of the Learned Chief Judicial Magistrate was kept in abeyance till 15.9.2026. No appeal is filed against this order. Earlier, the 2nd Respondent availed loan from M/s. Hinduja Housing Finance Limited and created mortgage and after its discharge availed two loans from the R1 Respondent Bank. The sale notice is issued only in respect of one of the loans. The claim that the Petitioner has not been paid the sale consideration is not true for the reason that the sale deed is a registered document and it has details about the payments made through cash, through cheques, and RTGS. The sale deed is dated 2.3.2021 but the cheques are dated 20.2.2021, and 23.2.2021. If the cheques had not been honoured, as alleged, there was no need for the Petitioner to register the sale deed subsequently on 2.3.2021. The sale is over and third-party interest is created. Only to put blocks in the measures taken for realising the debt due and to harass the R1 Respondent Bank, this appeal is filed. Pre- deposit is mandatory to entertain this appeal.

Advocate Mr. R. Kannan offers to file Vakalat for R2. Further, he submits that pre-deposit is mandatory to entertain this appeal.

Considered the rival submissions and perused the records.

The issue as to whether the Petitioner can claim himself as the person aggrieved after selling the property i.e., the secured asset through registered sale deed is an important question that has to be adjudicated in the appeal. Be that as it may. Pre-deposit is mandatory for entertaining the appeal under Section 18(1) of the SARFAESI Act, 2002. As per the submission of the R1 Respondent Bank, the property is sold for Rs.71.75 lakhs.

Since the auction purchaser is not impleaded before DRT-III, Chennai and also before this Tribunal, Petitioner is directed to take steps for impleading the auction purchaser.

In the said circumstances, this Tribunal directs the Petitioner to make 30% of Rs.71.75 lakhs in two equal instalments as pre-deposit within a period of four weeks from today, failing which this appeal would stand rejected.

30% of Rs.71.75 lakhs comes to Rs.21,52,500/-, out of which the first instalment of Rs.10,76,250/- to be made on or before 11.11.2026 and the second instalment of Rs.10,76,250/- to be made on or before 25.11.2026.

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 27.11.2026 for compliance.

Sd/-

Chairperson