SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

IN THE HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA
Soumitra Pal, J.
Shivam Trading Co. and another - Petitioners
Versus
Allahabad Bank and another - Respondents
W.P. NO. 2950(W) of 2015
Decided On : 3-3-2015

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner:Debabrata Dasgupta, Advocate.
For the Respondents:Shamit Sanyal and Samit Bhanja, Advocates.

Mortgage by deposit of title deeds is considered an arrangement under which security interest is created in favor of the secured creditor and does not require registration under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Investment of Security Interest Act, 2002.

Headnote:

SECURITISATION AND RECONSTRUCTION OF FINANCIAL ASSETS AND INVESTMENT OF SECURITY INTEREST ACT, 2002 - Mortgage by Deposit of Title Deeds - Section 2(zb), 2(ze), 2(zf) - Mortgage by deposit of title deeds does not require registration under the 2002 Act as it is considered an arrangement under which security interest is created in favor of the secured creditor.

Fact of the Case:

The petitioners challenged the notices issued by the Allahabad Bank under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Investment of Security Interest Act, 2002 (2002 Act) for recovery of dues on the ground that the mortgage by deposit of title deeds did not create a security interest due to the absence of registration.

Finding of the Court:

The court held that the 2002 Act specifically includes 'any other document or arrangement' under which security interest is created in favor of the secured creditor, including the creation of mortgage by deposit of title deeds, within the definition of 'security agreement'. Therefore, mortgage by deposit of title deeds does not require registration under the 2002 Act.

Issues: Whether mortgage by deposit of title deeds requires registration under the Transfer of Property Act, 1882, the Registration Act, 1908, and the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Investment of Security Interest Act, 2002.

Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on the definitions of 'security agreement', 'secured debt', and 'security interest' under the 2002 Act to conclude that the 2002 Act encompasses not only registered agreements or instruments but also any other document or arrangement, including creation of mortgage by deposit of title deed, under which security interest is created in favor of the secured creditor.

Final Decision: The court dismissed the writ petition, holding that mortgage by deposit of title deeds does not require registration under the 2002 Act and that the notices issued by the Allahabad Bank were valid.

JUDGMENT :

Soumitra Pal, J.

1. In the writ petition, the petitioners have prayed for a direction upon the Authorized Officer, Allahabad Bank, Zonal Office, the respondent no.2, to consider the representation dated 20th January, 2015 in accordance with the guidelines framed by the Reserve Bank of India. Prayer has also been made for declaring the property in question as not a "secured asset" as no security interest has been created in terms of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Investment of Security Interest Act, 2002 (for short 2002 Act'). Challenge is also to the notices issued by the said respondent no.2 under the 2002 Act.

2. Relying on the definition of "Security Agreement", "Secured Debt" and "Security Interest" under the 2002 Act, it is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that since interest was created by deposit of title deeds and since there was no registration, in view of the provisions contained in the Transfer of Property Act, 1882, the Registration Act, 1908 as well as under the 2002 Act, the respondent authorities cannot proceed under the 2002 Act. Moreover, in an unregistered mortgage by deposit of title deeds, the respondent authorities cannot proceed under the provisions of the 2002 Act. In support of his submission, learned advocate for the petitioners has relied on the judgments of the Supreme Court in Rachpal v. Bhagwandas: AIR 1950 SC 272, in United Bank of India v. Lekharam S. & Co.: AIR 1965 SC 1591, in V.G. Rao v. Andhra Bank: AIR 1971 SC 1613, in Standard Chartered Bank v. V. Noble Kumar: (2013) 9 SCC 620 and in State of Haryana v. Navir Singh : 2014(4) WBLR 561.

3. Learned advocate appearing on behalf of the respondents submits that it is evident that Parliament while enacting the 2002 Act had kept in mind the provisions contained in the Transfer of Property Act and the Registration Act. The definition of "Security Agreement" is wide enough to encompass not only an agreement or instrument but also any other document or arrangement, including creation of mortgage by deposit of title deed under which security interest is created in favour of the secured creditor. Submission is 'security interest', as defined in section 2 (zf) of the 2002 Act, also brings into its ambit the right, title and interest whatsoever in any kind of property in favour of the secured creditor including any mortgage, charge or hypothecation. Moreover, under the Transfer of Property Act, in Kolkata, a Presidency town, mortgage by deposit of title deeds requires no registration. The learned advocate for the respondents has relied on the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Kehar Singh v. Delhi Administration: AIR 1988 SC 1883, particularly paragraph 227 thereof, in support of his submission.

4. In the instant case, admittedly the petitioners had availed case credit facility from the respondent bank by deposit of title deeds. Now, the question is whether it requires registration as contended on behalf of the petitioners. Before embarking to answer the issue, it is relevant to refer sections 2(zb), 2(ze) and 2(zf) of the 2002 Act, which are as under:

Section 2(zb):

"security agreement" means an agreement, instrument or any other document or arrangement under which security interest is created in favour of the secured creditor including the creation of mortgage by deposit of title deeds with the secured creditor;

Section 2(ze):

"secured debt" means a debt which is secured by any security interest;

Section 2(zf):

"security interest" means right, title and interest of any kind whatsoever upon property, created in favour of any secured creditor and includes any mortgage, charge, hypothecation, assignment other than those specified in section 31"

5. It is evident that "Security Agreement" brings within its scope and ambit not only an agreement or instrument or document which may be registered but also significantly "any other document or arrangement" under which security interest is created in favour of the secured cr



Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

AI

SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top