Back
G. S. KULKARNI, RAJESH. S. PATIL
Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited – Appellant
Versus
State of Maharashtra – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Rajesh S. Patil, J.
1. Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith. Heard finally by consent of the learned counsel for the parties.
2. This Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has prayed for the following reliefs :-
(a1) This Hon'ble Court be pleased to issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other Writ of the like nature thereby quashing or setting aside the impugned letter/communication dated 17.11.2022 directing that the possession of the secured asset cannot be taken until appropriate orders are passed in Civil Suit filed by Petitioner in District Court Pune being Civil Suit No. 1436 of 2015.
(b) This Hon'ble Court be pleased to issue a Writ of Certiorari or any other Writ of the like nature thereby directing the Respondent No.2 and 3 to forthwith and or within such time as thi
Point of Law : Nature of powers to be exercised by learned Chief Metropolitan Magistrate/learned District Magistrate, High Court in impugned judgment and order has rightly observed and held that powe....
(1) Possession of secured asset – Powers exercisable by CMM/DM under Section 14 of SARFAESI Act are ministerial step – Section 14 of SARFAESI Act does not involve any adjudicatory process qua points ....
The court clarified that the jurisdiction of the relevant Authority under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act is limited to assisting a secured creditor in recovering possession of secured assets from a d....
Under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act, a court is not required to provide notice to a debtor or consider claims from third parties regarding secured assets during the possession proceedings.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
