State Bank of India vs Sri Vetrivel Traders — 1949/2024
Case under Securitisationandreconstructionoffinancialassets&enforcementofsecurityinterestact Section Section 14. Status: Await Reports. Next hearing: 27th March 2026.
CRLMP - Criminal Miscellaneous Petition
CNR: TNVR020051122024
Next Hearing
27th March 2026
e-Filing Number
05-12-2024
Filing Number
4720/2024
Filing Date
18-12-2024
Registration No
1949/2024
Registration Date
19-12-2024
Court
Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Srivilliputhur, Virudhunagar
Judge
2-Chief Judicial Magistrate
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
State Bank of India
Adv. Pethu Rajesh
Respondent(s)
Sri Vetrivel Traders
Hearing History
Judge: 2-Chief Judicial Magistrate
Await Reports
Await Reports
Await Reports
Await Reports
Await Reports
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 06-03-2026 | Await Reports |
| 20-02-2026 | Await Reports |
| 06-02-2026 | Await Reports |
| 23-01-2026 | Await Reports |
| 03-01-2026 | Await Reports |
Interim Orders
PETITION ALLOWED The Chief Judicial Magistrate court at Srivilliputhur allowed State Bank of India's petition under the SARFAESI Act seeking court assistance to take physical possession of four mortgaged properties. The court found that the borrower and guarantors defaulted on a Rs.4.98 crore loan facility (outstanding dues Rs.3.87 crore as of May 2024), and that the bank had properly complied with all statutory procedures including demand notice and possession notice. An Advocate Commissioner was appointed to take inventory, secure physical possession of the properties, and hand them over to the bank. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
PETITION ALLOWED The Chief Judicial Magistrate court at Srivilliputhur allowed State Bank of India's petition under the SARFAESI Act seeking court assistance to take physical possession of four mortgaged properties. The court found that the borrower and guarantors defaulted on a Rs.4.98 crore loan facility (outstanding dues Rs.3.87 crore as of May 2024), and that the bank had properly complied with all statutory procedures including demand notice and possession notice. An Advocate Commissioner was appointed to take inventory, secure physical possession of the properties, and hand them over to the bank. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Explore other courts