Madras High Court
K.Pravinth vs The Tamilnadu Mercantile Bank ... on 5 July, 2022
C.R.P.(MD)No.1330 of 2022
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 05.07.2022
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.S.SUNDAR
and
THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE S.SRIMATHY
C.R.P.(MD)No.1330 of 2022 and
C.M.P.(MD)No.5500 of 2022
K.Pravinth ... Petitioner
Vs.
The Tamilnadu Mercantile Bank Limited,
Nagamalai Pudukottai Branch,
represented by its Chief Manager,
Madurai, Madurai District. ... Respondent
Prayer: Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of Constitution of
India, to revise the order of the Debts Recovery Tribunal made in I.A.No.
405 of 2022 in O.A.No.211 of 2022, on its file passed by the Presiding
Officer of Coimbatore in-charge of Madurai, Debts Recovery Tribunal,
dated 25.03.2022 forthwith.
For Petitioner :Mr.S.Palani Velayutham
For Respondent :Mr.T.Thevan
***
ORDER
(Order of the Court was made by S.S.SUNDAR, J.)
This Civil Revision Petition is filed as against the interim order
made in I.A.No.405 of 2022 in O.A.No.211 of 2022 on the file of the Debts
Recovery Tribunal, Madurai.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.R.P.(MD)No.1330 of 2022
2.Heard Mr.S.Palani Velayutham, learned Counsel for the
petitioner and Mr.T.Thevan, learned Counsel for the respondent.
3.By the impugned order, the petitioner was directed to furnish
security to the value of Rs.61,67,719/- to the respondent Bank, failing
such deposit, a further direction was issued by the Debts Recovery
Tribunal that the property of the petitioner shall be attached.
4.The grievance of the petitioner is that as against the total
outstanding of Rs.60 lakhs and odd, the respondent Bank has sold the
property of the petitioner and recovered a sum of Rs.40 lakhs and odd, by
initiating SARFAESI proceedings. The further grievance of the petitioner
is that after realising a substantial amount, the respondent Bank is
proceeded against the another property of the petitioner, which is not
even mortgaged or secured for the loan.
5.The respondent Bank has filed an application before the
Tribunal for attached before judgment and after issuing notice and
hearing the petitioner, the Tribunal has passed the impugned order by
directing the petitioner to furnish a security to the value of
Rs.61,66,719/-.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.R.P.(MD)No.1330 of 2022
6.The grievance of the petitioner is that the outstanding, as on
date, is admittedly reduced to Rs.18,04,360.11/- and that the direction of
Tribunal to furnish security to the value of Rs.61,66,790.11/- is on the
higher side.
7.However, the learned Counsel for the respondent Bank
submitted that the Registrar has refused to register the sale deed, which
was earlier executed by the Recovery Officer in favour of the auction
purchaser. He, therefore, submitted that the Bank is justified in asking
the petitioner to furnish security equivalent for the entire liability.
8.This Court is unable to accept the arguments of the learned
Counsel for the respondent Bank. It is to be noted that the decision of
Registrar refusing to register the document does not mean that the title
of the petitioner in respect of the mortgaged property is decided by the
Registrar. It is open to the Bank or the auction purchaser to approach
the appropriate forum for appropriate relief. There is no document or
Civil Court decree is produced to show that the property, which was
mortgaged by the petitioner, belonging to a religious institution or
temple.
9.It appears that without even holding an enquiry on the basis
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.R.P.(MD)No.1330 of 2022
of a communication sent by the religious institution, the Registrar has
recorded that the document pertaining to the property, which according
to the religious institution belonging to them, cannot be registered.
Further, the respondent bank is not prepared to cancel the sale deed, so
that the petitioner's property will be available in the hands of the
petitioner to mobilize substantial amount.
10.Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the
impugned order passed by the Tribunal is modified by directing the
petitioner to furnish security to the value of Rs.19,00,000/-. In all other
aspects, the impugned order of the Tribunal, dated 25.03.2022 will stand.
11.With the above, this Civil Revision Petition is disposed of. No
costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
[S.S.S.R., J.] [S.S.Y., J.]
05.07.2022
Index : Yes / No
cmr
To
The Presiding Officer of Coimbatore
in-charge of Madurai, Debts Recovery Tribunal.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.R.P.(MD)No.1330 of 2022
S.S.SUNDAR, J.
and
S.SRIMATHY, J.
cmr
C.R.P.(MD)No.1330 of 2022
05.07.2022
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
