Ramyaa Yuvanesan v. Union Bank Of India

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 16.12.2025 CORAM :

THE HONOURABLE MR. MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA, CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.ARUL MURUGAN Ramyaa Yuvanesan W/o. Yuvanesan No.19, Vaikakkarn Street Purasaiwalkam Vepery, Chennai 600 007 Petitioner Vs 1.Union Bank of India Rep. by the Authorised Officer, Asset Recovery Branch, No.9, Elcanso Complex, Casa Major Road Egmore, Chennai 600 008 2.Jotham Ferro Alloys Pvt. Ltd., Rep. by its Director Harris Gabriel, No.14, Matharpakkam Village, Tiruvallur, Matur Pannur, Gummidipoondi Taluk Chennai 601 202

3.Mathivanan S/o.Subramani, No.3/2570 Indira Gandhi Salai Manapakkam, Kancheepuram Tamil Nadu 600 125 Respondents PRAYER : Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking issuance of a writ of mandamus directing the 1st respondent to take and hand over possession of the property admeasuring 11035 sq. ft. along with building constructed thereon comprised in Survey Nos. 11/1B, 11/2, 11/5 as per patta bearing No.3777, New Survey No. 11/1B1 and 11/2A2 of Mugalivakkam Village, Alandur Taluk, Kancheepuram District 600 125 to the petitioner within a time frame to be fixed by this Hon'ble Court and consequently direct the 1st respondent to take necessary steps to register the sale certificate dated 7.05.2024 issued to the petitioner.

For Petitioner:

Mr.G.Adithyaraj For Respondents:

Mrs.K.Jayaganga for Mrs.Ananda Gomathy Murugesan for respondent No.1 Mr.Gurumoorthy for respondent Nos.2 and 3

ORDER

(Order of the Court was made by the Hon'ble Chief Justice) Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. The grievance of the petitioner, the auction-purchaser, was noted earlier by this Court on 28.10.2025 that, despite the sale having been successfully conducted and the petitioner having been paid huge amount of Rs.5.58 crores, possession has not been handed over.

3. The records and the statements made by learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned counsel for respondent Nos.2 and 3 make it clear that though remedy has been taken against the order passed under Section 14 of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (the Act), the interim order passed has now been vacated. As on date, there is no interim order. If that be so, now the order passed by the Magistrate under Section 14 of the Act should be given effect to forthwith.

4. We direct that possession shall be handed over to the

petitioner forthwith with or without the assistance of the AdvocateCommissioner. If necessary, the Advocate-Commissioner shall take the assistance of the jurisdictional police, who, in turn, shall render all assistance to the Advocate-Commissioner. The said exercise shall be completed within 15 days. A report shall be made to the jurisdictional Debts Recovery Tribunal.

5. The petition is, accordingly, closed. There shall be no order as to costs.

(MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA, CJ) (G.ARUL MURUGAN,J) 16.12.2025 Index :

Yes/No :

Yes/No bbr To:

The Authorised Officer, Union Bank of India Asset Recovery Branch, No.9, Elcanso Complex, Casa Major Road Egmore, Chennai 600 008

THE HON'BLE CHIEF JUSTICE AND G.ARUL MURUGAN,J.

bbr 16.12.2025