Sarfaesi act in agricultural land

Sale of agricultural land is against the provision of Sarfaesi Act. 

A Bank can not sell agri land under Sarfaesi. 

Contact a local lawyer. U'll get the land back.

mharit@in.com

1. Your application has been rejected by the concerned DRT due to delay in filing the same & DRT has no authority to condone the delay in filing application,

2. You should have filed the said application within 45 days from the date of the Possession Notice or the Sale Notice issued to you u/s13(4) of SARFAESI Act,2002 copies of which you had already received,

3. Now file an appeal before the DRAT praying for a direction upon the DRT to hear your application condoning the delay duly giving account for each day's delay,

4. If DRAT also rejects your application, file a W.P. before the High Court with the same prayer specifying that you are ready to pay the outstanding.

Mr. K. K. Ganguly  Advocate is right.  Follow his advise.

DEAR MR. JIJI

                        DEAR MR. BISWANATH ROY AND MY FRIEND MR. K.K. GANGULY KINDLY BEAR WITH ME FOR MY OPINION IN THIS MATTER IS DIFFERENT FROM WHAT YOU HAVE STATED IN THIS CASE . HE SHOULD HAVE GONE TO THE DEBT RECOVERY TRIBUNAL OR  ON APPEAL TO THE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BEFORE THE PROPERTY IS AUCTIONED . BOTH THE TRIBUNALS DON'T HAVE POWERS TO CONDONE THE DELAY . EVEN IF THE PROPERTY HAD BEEN AUCTIONED BUT NONE HAVE PURCHASED THAT , THEN HE WILL HAVE CHANCE TO RETRIEVE HIS PROPERTY . ONCE THE PROPERTY IS AUCTIONED AND SOMEBODY HAD BID FOR THAT AND THE BANK HAD ISSUED THE LETTER THEN HE CANNOT DO ANYTHING . HIS PROPERTY IS GONE . EVEN THE CONDITION THAT THE BANK HAD NOT REGISTERED THE PROPERTY IN THE BUYER'S NAME AND BEFORE THAT THE PREVIOUS OWNER HAD REMITTED THE AMOUNT EVEN BY A DEMAND DRAFT WILL NOT STAND THE SCRUTINY OF THE ACT .

        I AM GIVING HERE UNDER A JUDGEMENT IN WHICH THE SINGLE JUDGE HAD ALLOWED THE WRIT PETITION ON THE GROUND THAT THE BANK HAD NOT REGISTERED THE PROPERTY IN THE NAME OF THE BUYER AND ALLOWED THE WRIT PETITION . BUT ON APPEAL A TWO JUDGE BENCH OF THE SAME COURT HAD REVERSED THE ORDER OF THE SINGLE JUDGE AND ALLOWED THE WRIT APPEAL PREFERRED BY THE BANK .

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF THE MADRAS HIGH COURT. JUDGEMENT DATED 10TH AUGUST 2007 . CORAM : MR. JUSTICE P.D, DINAKARAN AND JUSTICE MR. P.R.SHIVAKUMAR - W.A. (MD ) 145 OF 2007 AND W.A.146 OF 2007. APPELLANT - BANK OF INDIA , PALAYAMKOTTAI , TIRUNELVELI - 627002.

       KINDLY GO THROUGH THE JUDGEMENT . EVERYTHING IS VERY CLEAR IN THAT . MANY CASES ARE REFERRED IN THAT . - JOSEPH WILFRED - 25/02/2014 AT 00.46 HRS 

1. One of my clients Mr. Aftab Alam had purchased a house through E-Auction in Patna & after collecting the sale certificate & taking possession of the same, with police help prayed by the Bank u/s14 of SARFAESI Act,2002,  has renovated the house after spending almost half of the amount at which he had purchased the house,

2. The Borrower had filed a W.P. before the Patna High Court after all the above things happened,

3. Hon'ble Patna High Court had directed the patna DRT to hear the matter without mentioning anything about the delay in filing application,

4. Patna DRT had reopened the matter & directed the Borrower to pay the outstanding dues alongwith the renovation cost to the Bank for its returning the same to the Purchaser Mr. Aftab Alam,

5. Mr. Alam had approached me for filing an appeal before the DRAT at Kolkata which was done just 11 months ago,

6. Now the jurisdiction of patna has changed  from DRAT, Kolkata, so the file has been returned to Mr. Alam,

7. From the above it is clear that the matter can be revived by High Court's order.

Advocate Mr. K. K. Ganguly is right.  i had a same similar and identical case which was on the verge of auction  but remedied by a remand order to DRT condoning delay by a WP disposed by the Calcutta High Court.

Mr.Joseph Wilfred's opinion is right to the extent of property of non-agricultural status, here the property is agricultural,a writ petition stating the facts about the status of the property would fetch some relief.

my land 150 Cents (Rubber plantation 250 trees) was auctioned by bank to my neighbour, he was already took immutation and I approached DRT Ernakulam (Kerala), I submitted the relevant details such as wet land certificate from Village officer , BTR Copy, Certificate of Agricultural officer. But unfortunately DRT passed orders that my arguments factors in untimely and delay so unfavour to me. I am ready to give the amount Rs.11 lakh to restore my valuable (@Cent 1.5 Laks) property. Any chance to win in higher appellate authority ( DRAT)in this case.? my land 90 Cents (Rubber plantation 100 trees) was auctioned by bank to my neighbour, he was already took immutation and I approached DRT Ernakulam (Kerala), I submitted the relevant details such as wet land certificate from Village officer , BTR Copy, Certificate of Agricultural officer. But unfortunately DRT passed orders that my arguments factors in untimely and delay so unfavour to me. I am ready to give the amount Rs.11 lakh to restore my valuable (@Cent 1.5 Laks) property. Any chance to win in higher appellate authority ( DRAT)in this case.? my land 90 Cents (Rubber plantation 100 trees) was auctioned by bank to my neighbour, he was already took immutation and I approached DRT Ernakulam (Kerala), I submitted the relevant details such as wet land certificate from Village officer , BTR Copy, Certificate of Agricultural officer. But unfortunately DRT passed orders that my arguments factors in untimely and delay so unfavour to me. I am ready to give the amount Rs.11 lakh to restore my valuable (@Cent 1.5 Laks) property. Any chance to win in higher appellate authority ( DRAT)in this case.? 

I REITERATE MY VIEWS AND  Mr. K. K. GANGULY'S VIEWS ARE CORRECT. YOU MAY GIVE THIS CASE TO Mr. K. K. GANGULY FOR ITS SUCCESS.