Back
ALI MOHAMMAD MAGREY, PUNEET GUPTA
Jabeena Afroz – Appellant
Versus
Authorized Officer, Impaired Assets, Portfolio Management Department – Respondent
ORDER :
Ali Mohammad Magrey, J.
By this Petition, the Petitioners have assailed the Order dated 16th of January, 2020 passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Srinagar, on an application filed under Section 14 of the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’), whereby and whereunder the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate has appointed the Station House Officer of the concerned Police Station to take possession of the immoveable property/ secured asset, i.e., residential house with land underneath and appurtenant thereto measuring 01 Kanal and 14 ½ Marlas falling under Khasra No. 224 Min and 712 Min, Khata No. 22 Min and Khewat No. 12 Min situate at Azad Colony, 90 ft Road, Soura, Srinagar in Estate Awantabhawan, Tehsil and District Srinagar in the name of one Late Afroz Hussain Wani/ husband of the Petitioner No.1 herein and submit the report on the next date with prior information to the Authorized Officer of the Bank to remain present on spot on the scheduled date.
2. The Res
Possession of secured assets – Banks and financial institutions have to apprise their borrowers of reason for not accepting objections or points raised in reply to notice served upon them.
In SARFAESI Act proceedings, a magistrate is not required to notify borrowers prior to granting possession, emphasizing procedural compliance over notice requirements.
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.
Subsection 3 of Section 13 makes it clear that a notice under Subsection 2 shall give details of the amount payable by the borrower. If Ms.Lodha’s submission were to be accepted, then the word “shall....
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 ....
The court established that the 15-day response period in Section 13(3A) of the SARFAESI Act is directory, not mandatory, allowing the Bank to proceed with possession despite delays.
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....
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
