191090002222019_a160be27d8c0a7b81dc5fde49b66198e.pdf

1                                             Reportable / Non-reportable
Judgement reserved on 06.11.2025
Judgement pronounced on 18.11.2025
IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AT KOLKATA
 Appl. No. 10 of 2020
(Arising out of R.A. 02 of 2019 in S.A. 187 of 2016 – DRT-I Hyderabad)
THE HON’BLE JUSTICE SHRI ANIL KUMAR SRIVASTAVA, 
CHAIRPERSON
18.11.2025
                                                                               
State Bank of India, RACPC, 2nd floor, CCPL, 
Sterling Building, Himayathnagar Main Road,
Hyderabad -500029.  
... Appellant
--Vs--
1(a). Chennuri Vimala,
1(b). Chennuri Subha Sree, 
Residing at Plot No.91, Near Panchamuka Anjareya 
Temple, Naasimha Rao Nagar, Vanathalipuram, 
Hyderabad – 500070.
2. Rageer Vasudev Yada, Resident of 1-7-716, 
Ramnagar, Musheerabad, Hyderabad. 
3(a). Smt. S. Umarani
3(b). S.Arunoday, 
3(c). S. Gayathri, 
Residing at Plot No. 376/2, H.No. 5-4-1299/1, Phase-3,
Road 35, Sharadha Nagar, Vanasthalipuram, Hyderabad 
– 500070,
... Respondent
For Appellant 
: Mr. Debasish Chakraborty , ld. adv.
For Respondent
: Mr. Nemani Srinivas, ld. Adv. 
THE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL :
Instant appeal is preferred against the order dated 
11.06.2019 passed by learned DRT-I Hyderabad in R.A. No. 02 of 
2019 arising out of S.A. No. 187 of 2016 [State Bank of India Vs. 
Sri Chennuri Muralidhar & Ors.] whereby learned DRT partly 

2                                             Reportable / Non-reportable
Judgement reserved on 06.11.2025
Judgement pronounced on 18.11.2025
allowed the Review application (RA 02 of 2019) only to the extent 
of incorporating two sentences in the order dated 25.01.2019 – 
one, “The applicant relied on the following citations” and other 
“The Respondent Bank relied on the following citations.”  
2.
As per pleadings of the parties, borrower, respondent no.1 
herein, availed financial assistance from the appellant bank, 
repayment of which was irregular, as such, loan account became 
NPA.  Appellant bank initiated SARFAESI proceedings by issuing 
Sec. 13(2) notice followed by the possession notice dated 
28.04.2016. Secured asset was auctioned by the bank to the 
successful auction purchaser, who is respondent no.2 herein, by 
issuing e-auction sale notice dated 09.05.2016 fixing sale date on 
17.06.2017.  Successful auction purchaser thereafter transferred 
the secured asset to third party, respondent no.3. 
3.
Respondent no.1 borrower filed S.A. 187 of 2016 before the 
learned DRT challenging the e-auction sale.  Conditional interim 
order dated 30.05.2016 was passed by the learned DRT to the 
effect that bank shall not proceed with the auction sale subject to 
payment of Rs.5.00 lakh by the securitization applicant borrower.  
Since the securitization applicant failed to deposit Rs.5.00 lakh, 

3                                             Reportable / Non-reportable
Judgement reserved on 06.11.2025
Judgement pronounced on 18.11.2025
bank confirmed the auction sale and issued sale certificate, which 
was registered in favour of the auction purchaser.  S.A. 187 of 
2016 was filed by the applicant, which was dismissed by the 
learned DRT vide order dated 27.12.2017.  
4.
Securitization applicant preferred appeal being no. 27 of 
2018 against the order dated 27.12.2017 before the DRAT, 
Kolkata which was allowed and the matter was remanded back 
for de-novo hearing to learned DRT. DRAT, Kolkata observed that 
reserve price was not fixed on the basis of valuation report. 
5.
Learned DRT heard the matter afresh and allowed the S.A. 
187 of 2016 on 25.01.2019 by setting aside the auction sale and 
sale certificate and directed bank to refund the sale proceeds to 
the auction purchaser with 12% interest.       
6.
Appellant bank filed an application before learned DRT for 
reviewing the order dated 25.01.2019 passed in S.A. under Rule 
5-A of the DRT (Procedure) Rules, 1993 read with Section 22(g) 
and (h) of the RDB Act, 1993.  The review application No. 02 of 
2019 was partly

…