Selvaraj C P vs Rajendran K on 16 July, 2026

    0
    6
    ADVERTISEMENT

    Bangalore District Court

    Selvaraj C P vs Rajendran K on 16 July, 2026

    Cri. M.A. No. 3218/2022                 1                              Order
    
                                                  Filed On          18    10 2022
                                                  Registered On 18        10 2022
                                                  Decided On        03    11 2022
                                                  Duration          Y     M     D
    
    
    
          IN THE COURT OF 11TH ADDITIONAL CHIEF JUDICIAL
                       MAGISTRATE SURAT.
    
                Criminal Misc. Application No. 3218 of 2022
    
                                                                    Exhibit-4.
    
    
         Applicant            : YES BANK LIMITED Through Its A.O.
                               Mr. Biren Dave,
                               Having its Surat Branch office at : 1st floor,
                               Orbit Tower, Opp. Krushi Bazar, Sahara
                               Darwaja, Surat - 395002.
    
    
                                      Versus
    
    
    
           Opponents          : 1. Mrs. Lataben Jayprakash Bhogoj
                                (Borrower & Mortgagor)
                               Plot No. 33, Shiv Park Society, Godadara
                               Naher, Road, Surat-395010.
                               And Also at:
                               117, Gujarat Housing Board, Ekta Nagar,
                               Parvat Gam, Choryasi, Surat - 395010.
                               And Also at:
                               F-702, 7th Floor, LIG-29, Suman Siddh, Nr.
                               Vrundavan Row House, Canal Road,
                               Dumbhal, Surat-305010.
    
    
    
    
    11th ACJM Surat
     Cri. M.A. No. 3218/2022              2                                Order
    
                              2. Mr. Jayprakash S          Bhogoj     (Co-
                              Borrower & Mortgagor)
                              Plot no. 33, Shiv Park Society, Godadara
                              Naher, Road, Surat-395010.
                              And Also at:
                              117, Gujarat Housing Board, Ekta Nagar,
                              Parvat Gam, Choryasi, Surat-395010.
                              And Also at:
                              F-702, 7th Floor, LIG-29, Suman Siddh, Nr.
                              Vrundavan Row House, Canal Road,
                              Dumbhal, Surat-305010.
    ===================================================
    Appearance: Ld. Advocate Mr. M.M. Bhatt for the Applicant.
    ====================================================
    
    Subject: The Application filed under section-14 of the SARFAESI
    Act, 2002
                                 JUDGMENT
    

    1. The present application has been filed by the applicant against
    the Opponents under section-14 of the Securitization and
    Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security
    Interest Act, 2002
    (hereinafter referred to as SARFAESI Act) Act for
    taking possession of secured asset as defined in section-2(zc) of the
    SARFAESI Act mentioned in the application and forward it to the
    applicant. The concise statement of the applicant’s case is that the
    applicant is secured creditor as defined in Section-2(zd) of the
    SARFAESI Act and the opponents are borrower as defined under
    section-2(f) of the SARFAESI Act. The applicant has been notified as
    financial institution for the purpose of the SARFAESI Act. It is further
    averred in the application that the applicant has satisfied all the
    requirement of section-14 of the SARFAESI Act and the applicant’s

    11th ACJM Surat
    Cri. M.A. No. 3218/2022 3 Order

    SPONSORED

    authorised officer has submitted his affidavit to that effect. Hence, the
    present application.

    EVIDENCE OF APPLICANT

    2. The applicant has submitted his affidavit along with the
    application as is required by the first Proviso to Section-14(1) of the
    SARFAESI Act and has submitted following documents in support of
    his application.

    Serial      List of documents
    No.
    1.          Copy of the RBI License
    2.          A copy of board resolution.
    

    3. Copies of Loan Documents like Sanction Letter and
    Promissory note

    4. A copy of loan agreement

    5. A copy of outstanding letter.

    6. A copy of the Demand Notice U/s 13(2) of the SARAFESI
    Act, 2003 And its compliance and RPAD Receipt and
    Paper Publication Two daily News Paper Gujarati and
    English

    7. A copy of the Symbolic Possession Notice U/s 13(4) of
    the SARAFESI Act, 2002 And its compliance and
    panchnama of 13(4) Notice Pasting Report, RPAD
    Receipt and Paper Publication Two daily News Paper
    Gujarati and English.

    8. A copy of sale deed No.7748

    9. A copy of Valuation report.

    Submissions on behalf of the applicant.

    3. The Ld. Advocate on behalf of the applicant has argued as per
    the averment made in the application.

    4. Following points are framed for determination of this case:-

    11th ACJM Surat
    Cri. M.A. No. 3218/2022 4 Order

    ISSUES

    Sr. No. Points for Determination

    1. Whether the applicant is entitled to the relief claimed in
    the application?

    2. What Order ?

    5. My findings for the above issues are as under :-

           Sr. No.                      Finding
           1.                       Affirmative
           2.                   As per final order.
    
    
                         REASONS FOR THE DECISION
    
    
    

    6. Before determination of this case, it would be necessary to refer
    some of the pronouncements governing the determination of an
    application filed under section-14 of the SARFAESI Act, 2002. The
    Hon’ble Supreme Court in “Standard Chartered Bank v. V. Noble
    Kumar
    ” reported in (2013) 9 SCC 620 has held as under;

    21. Under the scheme of Section 14, a secured creditor who
    desires to seek the assistance of the State’s coercive power for
    obtaining possession of the secured asset is required to make a
    request in writing to the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate or District
    Magistrate within whose jurisdiction, the secured asset is located
    praying that the secured asset and other documents relating thereto
    may be taken possession thereof. The language of Section 14
    originally enacted purportedly obliged the Magistrate receiving a
    request under Section 14 to take possession of the secured asset

    11th ACJM Surat
    Cri. M.A. No. 3218/2022 5 Order

    and documents, if any, related thereto in terms of the request
    received by him without any further scrutiny of the matter.

    22. However, the Bombay High Court in Trade Well v. Indian Bank
    [2007 Cri LJ 2544 (Bom)] opined:

    “2. … CMM/DM acting under Section 14 of the NPA Act is not
    required to give notice either to the borrower or to the third party.

    3. He has to only verify from the bank or financial institution
    whether notice under Section 13(2) of the NPA Act is given or not and
    whether the secured assets fall within his jurisdiction. There is no
    adjudication of any kind at this stage.

    4. It is only if the above conditions are not fulfilled that the
    CMM/DM can refuse to pass an order under Section 14 of the NPA
    Act by recording that the above conditions are not fulfilled. If these
    two conditions are fulfilled, he cannot refuse to pass an order under
    Section 14.”(emphasis supplied)
    The said judgment was followed by the Madras High Court in
    Indian Overseas Bank v. Sree Aravindh Steels Ltd. [AIR 2009 Mad
    10] Subsequently, Parliament inserted a proviso to Section 14(1)
    [ “Provided that any application by the secured creditor shall be
    accompanied by an affidavit duly affirmed by the authorised officer of
    the secured creditor, declaring that–(i) the aggregate amount of
    financial assistance granted and the total claim of the bank as on the
    date of filing the application;(ii) the borrower has created security
    interest over various properties and that the bank or financial
    institution is holding a valid and subsisting security interest over such
    properties and the claim of the bank or financial institution is within
    the limitation period;(iii) the borrower has created security interest
    over various properties giving the details of properties referred to in
    sub-clause (ii) above;(iv) the borrower has committed default in

    11th ACJM Surat
    Cri. M.A. No. 3218/2022 6 Order

    repayment of the financial assistance granted aggregating the
    specified amount;(v) consequent upon such default in repayment of
    the financial assistance the account of the borrower has been
    classified as a non-performing asset;(vi) affirming that the period of
    sixty days’ notice as required by the provisions of sub-section (2) of
    Section 13, demanding payment of the defaulted financial assistance
    has been served on the borrower;(vii) the objection or representation
    in reply to the notice received from the borrower has been considered
    by the secured creditor and reasons for non-acceptance of such
    objection or representation had been communicated to the borrower;

    (viii) the borrower has not made any repayment of the financial
    assistance in spite of the above notice and the authorised officer is,
    therefore, entitled to take possession of the secured assets under the
    provisions of sub-section (4) of Section 13 read with Section 14 of the
    principal Act;(ix) that the provisions of this Act and the rules made
    thereunder had been complied with:Provided further that on receipt of
    the affidavit from the authorised officer, the District Magistrate or the
    Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, as the case may be, shall after
    satisfying the contents of the affidavit pass suitable orders for the
    purpose of taking possession of the secured assets:Provided also
    that the requirement of filing affidavit stated in the first proviso shall
    not apply to proceeding pending before any District Magistrate or the
    Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, as the case may be, on the date of
    commencement of this Act.”] and also sub-section (1-A) “14. (1-A)
    The District Magistrate or the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate may
    authorise any officer subordinate to him–(i) to take possession of
    such assets and documents relating thereto; and(ii) to forward such
    assets and documents to the secured creditor.(2) For the purpose of
    securing compliance with the provisions of sub-section (1), the Chief

    11th ACJM Surat
    Cri. M.A. No. 3218/2022 7 Order

    Metropolitan Magistrate or the District Magistrate may take or cause
    to be taken such steps and use, or cause to be used, such force, as
    may, in his opinion, be necessary.(3) No act of the Chief Metropolitan
    Magistrate or the District Magistrate any officer authorised by the
    Chief Metropolitan Magistrate or District Magistrate done in
    pursuance of this section shall be called in question in any court or
    before any authority.”] by Act 1 of 2013.

    25. The satisfaction of the Magistrate contemplated under the
    second proviso to Section 14(1) necessarily requires the Magistrate
    to examine the factual correctness of the assertions made in such an
    affidavit but not the legal niceties of the transaction. It is only after
    recording of his satisfaction the Magistrate can pass appropriate
    orders regarding taking of possession of the secured asset.

    7. The Hon’ble High Court of Gujarat has in “IDBI Bank Ltd-
    through Authorized Signatory Vs. District Magistrate” reported at
    2011 SCC OnLine Guj 1280 held as under;

    5. So far as the first principal contention of the petitioner is
    concerned, the same merits consideration because the Chief
    Metropolitan Magistrate and the District Magistrate, under Section 14
    of the Securitisation Act are not empowered to decide the question of
    legality and propriety of any of the actions taken by the secured
    creditor under Section 13(4), which can be assailed under Section 17
    of the Securitisation Act by the aggrieved person. Under sub-section
    (3) of Section 14, the act of the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate or
    District Magistrate done in pursuance of the said section cannot be
    called in question in any court or before any authority. From the
    aforesaid provisions of law, it is evident that Chief Metropolitan

    11th ACJM Surat
    Cri. M.A. No. 3218/2022 8 Order

    Magistrate or District Magistrate is bound to assist the secured
    creditor in taking possession of the secured assets.

    6. The Authority who is called upon to act under Section 14 of
    the Securitisation Act can only assist, nay, is bound to assist the
    secured creditor in taking possession of the secured asset. As the
    Chief Metropolitan Magistrate and District Magistrate under Section
    14
    is not empowered to decide the question of legality and propriety
    of any of the actions taken by the secured creditor under Section
    13(4)
    , which may be assailed under Section 17 of the Act by the
    aggrieved person, under sub-section (3) of Section 14 of the
    Securitisation Act, the act of the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate or
    District Magistrate done in pursuance of said Section cannot be
    called in question in any court or before any authority. It is evident
    from the provisions of law that the District Magistrate while bound to
    assist the secured creditor in taking possession of the secured assets
    and to take the possession of the documents relating thereto and
    forward such assets and documents to the secured creditor, he is not
    empowered to decide the question of genuinity or propriety of such
    documents, including the document signed or agreed between the
    borrower and the secured creditor.

    8. The Hon’ble Supreme Court has in Indian Bank v. D.
    Visalakshi
    reported in (2019) 20 SCC 47 held as under;

    52. Applying the principle underlying this decision, it must follow
    that substitution of functionaries (CMM as CJM) qua the
    administrative and executive or so to say non-judicial functions
    discharged by them in light of the provisions of the Code of Criminal
    Procedure
    , would not be inconsistent with Section 14 of the 2002 Act;
    nay, it would be a permissible approach in the matter of interpretation

    11th ACJM Surat
    Cri. M.A. No. 3218/2022 9 Order

    thereof and would further the legislative intent having regard to the
    subject and object of the enactment. That would be a meaningful,
    purposive and contextual construction of Section 14 of the 2002 Act,
    to include CJM as being competent to assist the secured creditor to
    take possession of the secured asset.

    54. To sum up, we hold that CJM is equally competent to deal
    with the application moved by the secured creditor under Section 14
    of the 2002 Act.

    9. The Hon’ble Bombay High Court in CA. Manisha Mehta and
    ors. vs. The Board of Directors of Represented by its Managing
    Director of ICICI Bank and ors reported in AIRONLINE 2022 BOM
    1846 held as under;

    8. Pertinently, section 14 of the SARFAESI Act was
    amended twice, once in 2013 and then again in 2016. If it were the
    intention of the legislature to extend opportunity of hearing to a
    borrower before the District Magistrate/Chief Metropolitan Magistrate,
    as the case may be, it was free to do so. Advisedly, the legislature did
    not do so, for, it would have militated against the scheme of the
    SARFAESI Act and more 5902.wpl.8418-22 particularly section 13
    thereof. It is implicit in the scheme of the SARFAESI Act that natural
    justice, only to a limited extent, is available and not beyond what is
    expressly provided. There seems to be little merit in the argument
    advanced by Mr. Nedumpara and we hold that the language of
    section 14 is too clear and unambiguous, and does not admit of
    any requirement of complying with natural justice by putting the
    borrower on notice while an application thereunder is under
    consideration.

    
    
    
    
    11th ACJM Surat
     Cri. M.A. No. 3218/2022                10                            Order
    
    

    10. The Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in Devani Jagdishbhai
    Dahyabhai (Third Party) Appellant VERSUS DISTRICT
    MAGISTRATE SURAT Respondents reported in LAWS(GJH)-
    2018-12-26 held as under:-

    “27. I do not find any merit in the contention that the District
    Magistrate should have provided an opportunity of hearing to the writ
    applicant in the proceedings under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act.
    The Supreme Court in the case of Harshad Govardhan Sondagar
    (supra) and Vishal N. Kalsaria vs. Bank of India [ (2016) 3 SCC 762]
    has not laid down the law that the borrower or any aggrieved person
    may also be extended an opportunity of hearing in the proceedings
    under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act.”

    11. Considering the material produced by the applicant and
    perusing the affidavit submitted by the authorised officer of the
    applicant, it transpires to this court that the applicant has satisfied the
    requirement of section-14 of the SARFAESI Act so as to entitle it to
    have assistance of this Court. The secured asset has been situated
    withing the jurisdiction of this court. As per the pronouncement of
    Hon’ble Supreme Court in Indian Bank Case (supra), the Chief
    Judicial Magistrate is also empowered to entertain the application
    filed under section-14 of the SARFAESI Act. So, in view of the
    aforesaid reasons and discussion, my finding on issue no-1 is in
    affirmative. So far as to issue no-2 is concerned, I hereby pass
    following final order in the interest of justice;

    FINAL ORDER

    1. The Application of the applicant is hereby allowed.

    
    
    
    11th ACJM Surat
     Cri. M.A. No. 3218/2022               11                              Order
    
    

    2. I authorize, Mr. Rohitbhai A Parmar (Assistant) of this court
    to act as Court Commissioner under Section-14(1-A) of the
    Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and
    Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002
    .

    3. Court Commissioner is directed to take possession of asset and
    forward such asset to the secured creditor. The description of such
    asset is as under:-

    DESCRIPTION OF MORTGAGED PROPERTY/SECURED ASSET:

    “ALL The Piece And Parcel Of Flat No.Lig-29/F-702, On The 7th
    Floor Admeasuring 41.162 Sq.Mtr., Built Up Area And 35.177 Sq.
    Mtr. Carpet Area In The Scheme Known As “SUMAN SIDDHi”

    Situated At T. P. Scheme No. 33, (DUMBHAL) Of F.P. No. 63 In
    Village:Dumbhal, City Surat, Dist: Surat.

    Boundaries:

    East: Internal Road, North: Flat No. F-701,
    West: Passage And Flat No. F-703, South: Margin.”

    If the secured assets is found in closed condition, the Court
    Commissioner may take possession of this secured assets by
    breaking / opening the lock or may take any other steps he may
    think fit.

    After taking the possession of the secured assets, Court
    Commissioner shall prepare the inventory of any item, Documents
    relating to the assets if found in secured Assets and handover the
    same to the applicant.

    4. Copy of this Order be sent to the concerned Police
    Station. The Police Inspector of the concerned police station under
    whose Jurisdiction, the aforesaid Secured Assets is situated, shall
    provide necessary police Assistance / protection to the Court

    11th ACJM Surat
    Cri. M.A. No. 3218/2022 12 Order

    Commissioner on the date appointed by the Court Commissioner
    for taking possession of the secured assets.

    5. The Applicant Bank shall complete the necessary
    formalities for seeking police protection and also bear the
    expenses thereof.

    6. The Court Commissioner may take or cause to be taken
    such steps and use, or cause to be used such force, as he may, in
    his opinion be necessary.

    7. Applicant shall bear the expenses incurred in taking
    possession of the secured assets and shall provide all necessary
    assistance to the court commissioner in taking possession of the
    secured assets. Applicant is hereby directed at present to deposit
    lump-sum amount of Rs. 17,000/- towards the expenses and
    remuneration of court commissioner, within One Month from the
    date of Order. On depositing the above said amount in the court,
    the Court Commissioner is directed to complete the said
    procedure within 90 days or within the time limit extended by the
    court and submit the compliance report of completion of
    proceedings.

    The court commissioner shall carry out the said
    proceedings on public holidays or except court working hours.

    Signed and Pronounced in Open Court on 03/11/2022.

    Date : 03-11-2022                        Mr. A. K Gohil
                                        th
    Place : Surat.                    11    Additional Chief     Judicial
                                      Magistrate, Surat.
                                      ID CODE GJ00951
    
    
    
    
    11th ACJM Surat
     



    Source link

    LEAVE A REPLY

    Please enter your comment!
    Please enter your name here