Decided on November 18,2004



Pratibha Upasani, - (1.) MR. K.S. Sundar, Advocate for the appellant Bank is present. MR. Devanand, Advocate holding MR. G.R. Swaminathan for the respondents is present.
(2.) This miscellaneous appeal is filed by the appellant/original applicant State Bank of India being aggrieved by the order dated 23.3.2004 passed by the learned Presiding Officer of DRT, Hyderabad, in RA-4/2004 in CP-65/2003 in RP-62/2002 in OA-16/1996. By the impugned order the learned Presiding Officer allowed the appeal filed by the third party/ claimant D. Venkataramana Reddy. The said appeal was filed by him under Section 30 of the RDDB&FI Act, 1993, being aggrieved by the order passed by the Recovery Officer during recovery proceedings between the respondent Bank (appellant herein) and judgment debtors K. Subbamma @ K. Vimalamma and others. During the recovery proceedings, Recovery Officer had passed order for attaching the property of the judgment debtors but the third party claimant appeared and claimed that the same belonged to him and prayed for raising the attachment of that property in question. This prayer was rejected by the Recovery Officer against which appeal was preferred by the third party before the Presiding Officer of DRT, which was allowed. Being aggrieved, it is now the Bank who has approached this Appellate Tribunal by filing this miscellaneous appeal. Few facts which are required to be stated are as follows.
(3.) OA No. 16/1996 was filed by the appellant/original applicant namely, State Bank of India against four defendants for recovery of Rs. 2,62,48,419.94p. and for enforcement of securities. The said OA was allowed in favour of the Bank and Recovery Certificate dated 27.3.2002 came to be issued for Rs. 7,08,80,775.94p. Thereafter, recovery proceedings commenced. During the course of recovery proceedings, one claimant D. Venkataramana Reddy arrived on the scene who was the son-in-law of defendant No. 4 Smt. K. Vimalamma. He alleged that he was the owner of the property which was attached by the Recovery Officer. He submitted xerox copy of the agreement of sale alleged to have been executed by judgment debtor No. 4 Smt. K. Vimalamma on 12.3.1985 and also some writing showing that allegedly some advance payment was made to her to the extent of Rs. 12 lakhs towards consideration. The writing was on the reverse of the xerox copy of the agreement of sale. It was also submitted that the property which was the subject matter of the recovery proceedings was sold to him by his mother-in-law by this Agreement of Sale dated 30.3.1985 and that there was also suit filed by him in the Civil Court at Nellore, for specific performance of the said Agreement of Sale which was decreed in his favour on 25.1.1999.;

Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.