Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 15 (1.82 seconds)

Strides Air Systems (P) Ltd vs The Authorised Officer on 19 November, 2018

11. Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the Bank, Mr.Ganesh as well as the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the fourth respondent / auction purchaser, Mr.S.Prabhakaran, learned counsel for the respondents 2 and 3, Mr.G.Senthil Kumar, have vehemently opposed these submissions and urged that the Bank had http://www.judis.nic.in Order dt.21.11.2019 in WP No.28285 of 2019 [Strides Air Systems (P) Ltd. v. The Authorised Officer, State Bank of India] 10 / 36 to undertake the private treaty sales as the previous Sales Notices / auction notice published by the first respondent Bank could not fetch good buyers and the petitioner Borrower also failed to produce any bona fide buyer at that point of time and that after the properties in question were evaluated by the Authorised Valuers, the Reserve Price was fixed by the Bank and both the properties in question were sold for the consolidated sum of Rs.3.54 Crores. The said auction was bona fide and in accordance with law and provisions of the SARFAESI Act and therefore, the same deserves to be upheld by this Court.
Madras High Court Cites 6 - Cited by 1 - R Subbiah - Full Document

Mathew Varghese vs M.Amritha Kumar . on 5 December, 2014

In Mathew Varghese v. M.Amritha Kumar [(2014) 5 SCC 610], the Hon'ble Supreme Court laid down the detailed guidelines about the sale of secured assets by the secured creditor http://www.judis.nic.in Order dt.21.11.2019 in WP No.28285 of 2019 [Strides Air Systems (P) Ltd. v. The Authorised Officer, State Bank of India] 16 / 36 under the provisions of the SARFAESI Act, 2002 vis-a-vis Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993. It was held inter alia, by the Supreme Court that the compliance with Rule 8(1) to (3) of SARFAESI Rules, 2002 was mandatory and therefore, giving minimum time of 30 days notice for sale was necessary. In the present case, in the impugned sale notice dated 19.08.2019, the sale of secured assets was fixed on 13.09.2019, which is obviously less than 30 days mandatory period under Rule 8(1) of the Rules. Paragraphs 34 and 35 of the said judgment of the Supreme Court are quoted below for ready reference:
Supreme Court - Daily Orders Cites 0 - Cited by 36 - Full Document
1   2 Next