Back
KESANG DOMA BHUTIA
Adams Marketing Pvt. Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
State Bank Of India – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Kesang Doma Bhutia, J. - This case is an example of the plight/agony of a financial institution in realization of its own money from a defaulter borrower, to whom financial assistance was extended in crores of rupees to run their business since 2009 till 2017. The petitioners/the defaulter borrowers not only failed to pay the loan amount as per terms and conditions of the agreement but has been challenging each and every step that has been taken by a financial institution for recovery of its own money.
2. adams Marketing Private Limited and others have been accommodated different types of loan in corers of rupees during the period from 09.03.2009 till 2017 by the opposite party Bank. The borrower as a security have mortgaged their eight properties situated in the district of Howrah, three properties situated at Kharagpur in the District of West Medinipur and one property situated at Baranagar, in the District North 24 Parganas in favour of the Bank. The petitioners not only defaulted in payment of loan amount as per terms and conditions of the agreement but also made the bank to pay its income tax. Therefore, bank finding no other alternative classified the accounts of the b
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the District Magistrate's role under Section 14 of the SaRFaESI act is limited and non-adjudicatory, and the orders passed under this section ....
Possession of mortgaged property – Section 14 of SARFAESI Act, 2002 does not involve adjudicatory process qua points raised by borrower against secured creditor/bank taking possession of secured asse....
The District Magistrate's role under section 14 of the SARFAESI Act is ministerial and does not involve adjudication on the merits of the claim. The Magistrate's satisfaction with the information pro....
A borrower can contest possession under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act only through appeal under Section 17 after possession is taken.
Remedy of appeal under Section 17(1) of the SARFAESI Act is not available to secured creditors against District Magistrate orders but only to aggrieved parties.
The Court clarified the jurisdiction of the Chief Judicial Magistrate under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act, holding that both the District Magistrate and Chief Judicial Magistrate have the jurisdicti....
The District Magistrate is not required to grant an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners while examining applications filed by secured creditors under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act, 2002. The p....
The District Magistrate's jurisdiction under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act is limited to ascertaining whether the statements required by the secured creditor in its affidavit have been made. The Dis....
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
