P.RAMACHANDRA REDDY Vs. DEBTS RECOVERY APPELLATE TRIBUNAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Mr. Vivek Jain, learned counsel for the petitioners. Mr. Prabhakar Peri, learned counsel for the respondent No.2/Bank.

(2.) In Writ Petition No.38351 of 2014, the petitioners have assailed the validity of the order dtd. 18/9/2014 passed by the Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal at Kolkata, by which the appeal preferred by the petitioners under Sec. 18 of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2022 (hereinafter referred to as 'the SARFAESI Act') has been dismissed. Commercial Court Appeal No.8 of 2018 is directed against the Judgment dtd. 6/2/2018 passed in C.O.S.No.50 of 2017. On account of commonality of the issues, the writ petition as well as the Commercial Court Appeal were heard analogously and are being decided by this common judgment.

(3.) Relevant facts giving rise to the controversy involved in both the cases are that the appellants (hereinafter referred to as 'the owners') are the owners of four-storied building bearing Municipal Nos.3/4/683, 3/4/684 and New Shop adjacent to it and house No.3/4/685/1, admeasuring 297 square yards along with built up area of 13300 square feet, situated in front of Municipal Market, Narayanaguda, Hyderabad (hereinafter referred to as 'the schedule property'). The borrower had entered into a loan agreement on 11/12/2006 with the respondent No.2 (hereinafter referred to as 'the bank'). The respondent No.3 (hereinafter referred to as 'the borrower') approached the owners with an offer to purchase the schedule property for a sale consideration of Rs.1.50 crores. The buyers on receipt of three post dated cheques bearing Nos.422681, 422682 and 422683 executed the sale deed on 27/12/2006 in favour of the borrower, which was registered. On the same day, the owners and the borrower entered into a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) which contained a stipulation that in the event of non- realisation of the amounts mentioned in the cheques, the owners shall be entitled to seek cancellation of the sale deed.