Kamdhenu Agrotech Vs Authorized Officer (DRT Allahabad)
The Debts Recovery Tribunal (DRT) Allahabad adjudicated an application filed under Section 17 of the SARFAESI Act, 2002, by a partnership firm and its partners challenging the recovery measures taken by Union Bank of India. The Supreme Court had earlier directed disposal of the securitisation application (SA) within six months, but the matter remained pending due to the absence of a regular Presiding Officer until August 2025. The applicants obtained a loan in September 2020 for a dairy business after mortgaging their properties and that of a guarantor. Due to non-payment of instalments, the bank classified the account as NPA on 29 June 2023 and issued a demand notice on 10 August 2023. The applicants submitted a representation, followed by a reminder, and alleged that the bank issued a backdated rejection letter. They further asserted that possession and sale notices were not duly served, that symbolic possession was taken without proper procedure, and that auction of the mortgaged asset held on 29 August 2024 was illegal. They also challenged the sale certificate dated 13 September 2024 and argued that statutory requirements, including providing 30 days’ redemption notice, were not followed.
The bank responded that the applicants were habitual defaulters, and all notices—including demand, possession, and sale notices—were served by registered post to the address provided in the loan documents. It contended that symbolic possession was taken on 25 April 2024 and published in accordance with the Rules, and that the auction was conducted as per statutory procedure after an earlier sale attempt failed due to absence of bidders. The auction purchaser also submitted that he participated in a duly publicised auction, deposited the entire bid amount, and obtained a registered sale deed and mutation in his favour.
