Back
VAIBHAVI D. NANAVATI
Kalupur Commercial Co-Operative Bank Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Jay Silk Mills – Respondent
ORDER :
Vaibhavi D. Nanavati, J.
1. Issue Rule, returnable forthwith. Mr. Nandish H. Thackar, learned advocate waives service of notice of rule for and on behalf of the respondent Nos.2 and 3, Ms. Delshad A. Kapadia, learned advocate waives service of notice of rule for and on behalf of the respondent No.5 and Ms. Suman Motla, learned AGP waives service of notice of rule for and on behalf of the respondent Nos.6, 7 and 8.
2. The petitioner herein is a Multi State Cooperative Society registered under the Multi State Cooperative Societies Act, 2002. The petitioner herein served a notice upon the respondent on 04.02.2014 under Section 13(2) of the Securitization Act for recovery of an amount of Rs.83,85,589/-. Notice under Section 13(4) of the Securitization Act came to be issued by the petitioner herein on 21.05.2014.
2.1 The petitioner preferred application before the respondent No.6 under Section 14 of the Securitization Act on 20.10.2015 for possession of the secured asset being Plot No.61/A and 61/B admeasuring 85 square yard (800 sq. mtr. area) situated at Atopnagar Cooperative Housing Society Limited, Bhatar, bearing survey No.154, 155, Moje Village : Majura, Surat City as per the
The court established that magistrates must assist secured creditors in enforcing possession orders under the Securitization Act without adjudicating disputes over the legitimacy of the claims.
The court established that the executing authority under the Securitization Act must comply with orders for possession and cannot raise disputes regarding the secured asset.
A secured creditor retains the right to seek possession of secured assets even after issuing a sale certificate without physical possession, and the relevant authority acts ministerially under Sectio....
The jurisdiction of the Civil Court is completely barred in so far as those matters, which would fall for adjudication within the jurisdiction of the Tribunal.
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 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....
A borrower can contest possession under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act only through appeal under Section 17 after possession is taken.
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....
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
