D. Venkatesh vs Union Bank Of India on 5 October, 2023

[Cites 6, Cited by 0]

Central Information Commission

D. Venkatesh vs Union Bank Of India on 5 October, 2023

1. The issue under consideration arising out of the second appeal dated 24.01.2022 include non-receipt of the following information sought by the appellant through the RTI application dated 23.09.2021 and first appeal dated 22.11.2021:-

(a) As per subject matter e-Auction Sale Notice dated 26.05.2021, what was the Reserve Price fixed by Bank's Authorized Officer on subject matter CC and TL accounts?

(b) What was loan docs mentioned in the Sale Notice dated 26.05.2021 in which Auction date was fixed on 18.06.2021.

(c) What was cut of date and time (last date) fixed to successful bidder from the date of Auction sale dated 18.06.2021 by Authorized officer to pay balance 75% bid amount as per the Sale Notice mentioned terms and conditions dated 26.05.2021?

Page 1 of 8

(d) Please give me the correct address of the successful bidder of the subject matter sale conducted on 18.06.2021 and earlier sale as mentioned in the affidavit of Mr. V.Moorthy, Chief Manager of your Bank as para 11 to be affidavit in CMP No. 13665/2021 pending before Hon'ble CJM Court, Coimbatore dated 10.03.2021.

(e) Give details of bid amount quoted by the holder namely Mrs. V.Sarojini.

(f) On what time and date, bidder Mrs. Sarojini transferred her 10% EMD?

(g) On what time and date transferred 10% EMD amount of the holder Mrs. V.Sarojini was received by Bank?

(h) What is 10% of the EMD amount paid by the holder Mrs. V.Sarojini

(i) On what time and date the bidder Mrs. Sarojini transferred 15% of the bid amount out of balance 90% of her bid quoted in the subject matter Auction Sale?

(j) On what time and date transferred 15% of bid out of balance of 90% Sale Price of the holder Mrs. V.Sarojini was received by Bank?

(k) When di your bank receive 15% of the balance bid amount out of remaining 90% of the subject matter sale price from the said Mrs. V.Sarojini.

(l) In you bank's sale certificate filed before Hon'ble DRT on 21.09.2021, your authorized officer stated that the said Mrs. Sarojini has paid full sale consideration amount of Rs. 89,18,200/- by RTGS/NEFT made from 17.06.2021 to 09.09.2021 by 20 different time and dates like 17.09.2021, 19.06.2021, 21.08.2021, 03.09.2021, 04.09.2021, 05.09.2021, 06.09.2021, 07.09.2021, 08.09.2021 and 09.09.2021. Is statement of authorized officer given to Hon'ble DRT is correct and true?

(m) In the sale confirmation letter dated 21.06.2021 filed in the Hon'ble DRT bank has stated on 28.06.2021 that Rs. 50 was deducted as late free from Mrs. V. Sarojini. Please give me the details of late fee deducted from Mrs. V.Sarojini Page 2 of 8 whether delayed payment of first 10% EMD or subsequently received 15% of Sale Price.

(n) Please give the certified copy of Authorisation cum permission letter given by the authorized officer to the holder Mrs. V.Sarojini permitting her to pay second part of Rs.13,47,706.40 on 19.06.2021 at 5:30 PM which was after banking time.(during those periods, your bank's working hours fixed by Government and IBA only upto 2.30 PM due to COVID-19 full lockdown to control 2nd wave of Covid 19 spread)

(o) All payments are not paid by the bidder Mrs. V.Sarojini by way of RTGS/NEFT.

Is it true?

(p) In the sale confirmation letter filed before Hon'ble DRT on 28.06.2021, bank said that EMD of 10% was received on 18.06.2021. In the Sale certificate filed before Hon'ble DRT, your bank informed that 10% of EMD was received by the Bank on 17.06.2021. Please elucidate me which date is correct? (17.09.2021 or 18.09.2021)

(q) Please give me specific reasons for receiving sale price of Rs.89,18,200/- in twenty (20) different occasions, time and different dates as stated by the bank in your alleged sale certificated dated 09.09.2021.

(r) At page no. 6 and para no. 11 of affidavit filed on 10.03.2021 in CMP No.****2021 by Mr. V.Moorthi s/o Viswanthan working as Chief Manager of bank has solemnly affirmed before Hon'ble CJM Court Coimbatore that the secured asset of the subject matter loan has been sold title has been transferred to the auction purchaser under the provisions of the securitization act. Please give details of affidavit mentioning SARFAESI Sale proceeds with particulars of Auction Purchaser.

Page 3 of 8

(s) Has any competent authority of bank permitted concern authorised officers/authorized officer to receive alleged had amount of Rs. 89, 18,200/- even after 80 days from the date of last auction sale conducted on 18.06.2012?

(t) How many time the purchaser has purchased same subject matter properties? (u) What was the loan due as on the date of auction sale dated 18.06.2021 in the sale certificate mentioned account No. ******8368?

(v) What was the loan due as on the date of demand notice dated 04.11.2016 which is relevant to the sale certificate mentioned account no. *****8368? (Upto -(z))

2. Succinctly facts of the case are that the appellant filed an application dated 23.09.2021 under the Right to Information Act, 2005 (RTI Act) before the Central Public Information Officer (CPIO), Union Bank of India, Coimbatore, seeking aforesaid information. The CPIO vide letter dated 27.10.2021 replied to the appellant. Aggrieved by the same, the appellant filed first appeal dated 22.11.2021. The First Appellate Authority (FAA) vide order dated 21.12.2021 disposed of the first appeal. Aggrieved by that, the appellant filed second appeal dated 24.01.2022 before the Commission which is under consideration.

3. The appellant has filed the instant appeal dated 24.01.2022 inter alia on the grounds that reply given by the CPIO was not satisfactory. The appellant requested the Commission to direct the CPIO to provide the complete information and take necessary action as per Section 20 (1) of the RTI Act.

4. The CPIO replied vide letter dated 27.10.2021 and the same is reproduced as under:-

"a) The reserve price of the properties mentioned in the auction notice dated 26.05.2021 is Rs. 88,18,200/- (Rupees Eighty Eight lakhs eighteen thousand two hundred only).

b) Rs.42,18,743.72 as on 12.12.2018 with further interest, cost and expenses.

Page 4 of 8

c) The successful bidder shall deposit the balance 75% of the sale price on or before 15th day of confirmation of sale or within such extended period as agreed upon is writing not exceeding 3 months.

d) Third party information the disclosure of which has no relationship to any public activity or interest and would cause unwarranted invasion of the privacy of the individual and is exempted under Section 9 (1) (j) of the ACT.

e) Information is available with us in fiduciary relationship and we are satisfied that no larger public interest warrants the disclosure of such information and is exempted under section 8 (1) (e) of the Act. Hence we express our inability to furnish the information.

f) Information is available with us in fiduciary relationship and we are satisfied that no larger public interest warrants the disclosure of such information and is exempted under section 8 (1) (e) of the Act. Hence we express our inability to furnish the information.

g) Information is available with us in fiduciary relationship and we are satisfied that no larger public interest warrants the disclosure of such information and is exempted under section 8 (1) (e) of the Act. Hence we express our inability to furnish the information.

h) Information is unclear. However we wish to inform you that as per auction notice dated 26.05.2021, the EMD amount is Rs. 8,81,821/- (Rupees Eight lakh eighty one thousand eighty hundred and twenty only).

i) Information is available with us in fiduciary relationship and we are satisfied that no larger public interest warrants the disclosure of such information and is exempted under section 8 (1) (e) of the Act. Hence we express our inability to furnish the information.

j) Information is available with us in fiduciary relationship and we are satisfied that no larger public interest warrants the disclosure of such information and Page 5 of 8 is exempted under section 8 (1) (e) of the Act. Hence we express our inability to furnish the information.

k) Information is available with us in fiduciary relationship and we are satisfied that no larger public interest warrants the disclosure of such information and is exempted under section 8 (1) (e) of the Act. Hence we express our inability to furnish the information.

l) The applicant is seeking an opinion/explanation and not information as defined under RTI Act, 2005, we are unable to furnish reply.

m) No late feed deducted from the successful bidder.

n) No such document available with bank.

o) The applicant is seeking an opinion/explanation and not information as defined under RTI Act, 2005, we are unable to furnish reply.

p) EMD amount was received to Bank's account on 18.06.2021 after successful completion of e-auction.

q) The applicant is seeking an explanation and not information as defined under the RTI Act 2005. Hence, we are unable to furnish reply.

r) Regarding CMP 13665/2021 before the Chief Judicial Magistrate Court Coimbatore, the applicant herein is also a party to the proceedings. The petitions/documents etc. are served on the party/party's counsel as per court procedure. Applicant may obtain certified copies of relevant documents from the court.

s) Yes, in accordance with the SARFAESI Act and Rules there under.

t) The information sought by the applicant is unclear. However we wish to inform that the secured asset (described in detail in Auction Notice dated 26.05.2021 which is served to you also) has been successfully sold in e-

auction on 18.06.2021.

Page 6 of 8

u) Dues on 18.06.2021: Rs.27,28,924.16 (Rupees twenty seven lakh twenty eight thousand nine hundred and twenty four paise sixteen only) Legal and other charges Rs. 4,71,997.78 (Rupees four Lakh seventy one thousand nine hundred ninety seven paise seventy eight) plus further interest, costs, expenses.

v) Dues on 04.11.2016: Rs. 25,23,309.65 (Rupees twenty five lakh twenty three thousand three hundred and nine paise sixty five only) plus interest, costs, expenses and other charges.

w) The applicant is seeking an explanation and not information as defined under the RTI Act 2005. Hence, we are unable to furnish reply.

x) The applicant is seeking an explanation and not information as defined under the RTI Act 2005. Hence, we are unable to furnish reply.

y) The applicant is seeking an explanation and not information as defined under the RTI Act 2005. Hence, we are unable to furnish reply.

z) None"

The FAA vide order dated 21.12.2021 agreed to the reply given by the CPIO.

5. The appellant and on behalf of the respondent Shri Mahadev Nagappa Moger, Deputy Regional Head and Assistant General Manager, Union Bank of India, Coimbatore, attended the hearing through video conference.

5.1. The appellant inter alia submitted that the information provided by the respondent was incomplete. He requested the Commission to direct the respondent to provide complete and correct address of successful bidder.

5.2. The respondent while defending their case inter alia submitted that they had furnished point-wise reply and information. They further stated that the appellant had sought clarification/confirmation in the form of queries which were not covered within the definition of "information" under section 2 (f) of the RTI Act.

Page 7 of 8

6. The Commission after adverting to the facts and circumstances of the case, hearing both the parties and perusal of records, observed that due reply was given by the CPIO on 27.10.2021. Perusal of records revealed that the appellant had mostly raised questions seeking confirmation, which were not squarely falling within the definition of "information" under section 2 (f) of the RTI Act. That being so, there appears to be no infirmity with the reply given by the CPIO. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed.

Copy of the decision be provided free of cost to the parties.

Sd/-

(Suresh Chandra) (सुसुरेशचं ा) ा सूचनाआयु ) Information Commissioner (सू दनांक/Date: 05.10.2023 Authenticated true copy R. Sitarama Murthy (आर. सीताराममूत ) Dy. Registrar (उपपंजीयक) 011-26181927(०११-२६१८१९२७) Addresses of the parties:

The CPIO Union Bank of India, RegionalOffice, 1087D, 3rd floor, Krishna Towers, Pappanaickenpalayam Avinashi Road, Coimbatore Tamil Nadu -641037 First Appellate Authority Union Bank of India, Union Bank Bhawan, 3rd Floor, 139 Broadway, Chennai-600108, Tamil Nadu Shri D Venkatesh, Page 8 of 8

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Central Information Commission