PURITIPATI KRISHNA REDDY Vs. HMT MACHINE TOOLS LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Feeling aggrieved by the order, dated 27.06.2018, in S.A. No.7 of 2010 passed by the Debts Recovery Tribunal - I, Hyderabad, the petitioners in S.A. No.7 of 2010 the petitioners herein filed the present writ petition.

(2.) It is the contention of the petitioners that petitioner No.1 was the absolute owner and possessor of property bearing Plot No.19, admeasuring 691 square yards, forming part of Layout of Kalyannagar Cooperative Society Limited. He has purchased the same under a registered sale deed bearing document No.2591 of 1973. Subsequently, petitioner No.2 purchased half of the said property from petitioner No.1 under a registered sale deed bearing document No.455 of 1987 dated 01.06.1987. Petitioner Nos.1 and 2 entered into an oral agreement with respondent No.3 - Builder in the year 2000 for development of the said property into residential flats. Pursuant to the same, respondent No.3 after obtaining permission from the competent authority for construction of residential apartment i.e., stilt + 5 floors, constructed the residential flats. For the said purpose, respondent No.3 availed loan as well as overdraft facility from respondent No.2 bank, for which petitioner Nos.1 and 2 stood as guarantors and mortgaged their semi-finished flats under a registered mortgage deed dated 14.06.2002, details of which are as under:

(3.) Since respondent No.3 failed to repay the entire loan and overdraft facility obtained by it, respondent No.2 bank initiated proceedings under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (for short 'the Act') vide a notice, dated 25.04.2003, under Section 13 (2) of the Act demanding an amount of Rs.25,69,897/-. On receipt of the said notice, respondent No.3 paid a sum of Rs.10,00,000/- and accordingly respondent No.2 bank got redeemed the two flats i.e., northern side flat in first floor and southern side flat in fifth floor on 15.04.2004 as agreed. According to the petitioners, though amount was paid to redeem the third property, respondent No.2 bank did not release the same. 'C' Schedule property mentioned in the notice dated 25.04.2003 issued under Section 13 (2) of the Act contained no mention of relevant details for identity of property, such as door, floor number etc., except mentioning as 'semi-finished property'.