GOPINATH P.
Canara Bank – Appellant
Versus
Sachin Shyam, Proprietor, M/S. Skilderz Developers – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
The petitioner is a Banking Company constituted under the Banking Companies (Acquisition & Transfer of Undertakings) Act, 1970. It has approached this Court being aggrieved by Ext.P7 order of the Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Alappuzha, in proceedings under Section 14 of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act (hereinafter referred to as the ‘SARFAESI’ Act) Act.
2. The petitioner, a secured creditor in respect of a loan availed by the 1st respondent, brought to sale an item of property in which the 3rd respondent claims to be a tenant under the provisions of the SARFAESI Act. The property was purchased by the 4th respondent. The application filed by the petitioner under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act for obtaining vacant possession of the property has been rejected by the learned Magistrate finding inter alia the rights of the tenant cannot be defeated by the provisions in the SARFAESI Act. The learned Magistrate has concluded that the tenancy was created much before the creation of the mortgage, and therefore such tenants cannot be evicted by reporting to proceedings under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act.
Bajarang Shyamsundar Agarwal v. Central Bank of India
Balkrishna Rama Tarle Dead Thr. LRS & Anr. v. Phoenix ARC Private Limited & Ors
Harshad Govardhan Sondagar v. International Assets Reconstruction Co.Ltd. & Ors
Hemraj Ratnakar Salian v. HDFC Bank Ltd. & Ors. 2021 SCC Online SC 611
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.