Rohtash Yadav vs Punjab & Sind Bank & Ors. on 18 March, 2016

WP(C) 6126/2015 Page 1 of 7
2. The dues became sticky. The respondent No.1 initiated proceedings
under SARFAESI Act. The borrowers challenged the action taken, resulting
in SA No.61/2012 being registered before the Debts Recovery Tribunal.
3. During the pendency of the proceedings the petitioner was
approached by respondents No.3 and No.4 with a request to purchase
property No.225, SBI Colony, Paschim Vihar, New Delhi and duly
informed him that the property was mortgaged with the respondent No.1
bank. Petitioner met the officers of the bank. A consensus emerged between
the bank, the petitioner as also respondent No.3 and No.4 that the property
could be sold for `7 crores.

Source: Indian Kanoon

Leave a Reply