IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT SRINAGAR
Ali Mohammad Magrey, Puneet Gupta, JJ.
Jabeena Afroz and Ors. - Petitioners
Versus
Authorized Officer, Impaired Assets, Portfolio Management Department and Ors. - Respondents
CM(M) No.30/2020 and CM No.1262/2020
Decided On : 09-05-2022
Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002-Section 14-Possession of secured assets-Police assistance-Purpose and object of serving a notice upon borrower under sub-section (2) of Section 13 of Act is that a reply may be submitted by borrower explaining reasons as to why measures may or may not be taken under sub-section (4) of Section 13 in case of non- compliance of notice within 60 days-Creditor must apply its mind to Objections so raised in reply to such a notice and an internal mechanism must be particularly evolved to consider such Objections raised in reply to notice-There may be some meaningful consideration of Objections raised rather than to ritually reject them and proceed to take drastic measures under sub-section (4) of Section 13 of Act-Once such a duty is envisaged on part of creditor, it would only be conducive to principles of fairness on part of banks and financial institutions in dealing with their borrowers to apprise them of reason for not accepting Objections or points raised in reply to notice served upon them before proceeding to take measures under sub-section (4) of Section 13-Such reasons, overruling objections of borrower, must also be communicated to borrower by secured creditor-Such a person in respect of whom steps under Section 13(4) of Act are likely to be taken, cannot be denied right to know reason of non- acceptance and of his Objections. (Para 14)
Result-Petition allowed.
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 Respondent-Bank, on the request of the predecessor-in-interest of the Petitioners, is stated to have sanctioned and disbursed the following credit facilities in his favour:-
| S. No. | Nature of Facility | Amount |
| 01. | Cash Credit | 3,37,00,000/- |
| 02. | WCTL-2016 | 46,21,000/- |
| 03. | CTL-2016 | 93,000/- |
| Total |
| 3,84,14,000/- |
3. In lieu of the aforesaid financial assistance, the predecessor-in-interest of the Petitioners is claimed to have executed various security documents on 11th of August, 2017 creating security interest, inter alia, in respect of the following secured assets in favour of the Bank: (i) Hypothecation of Stocks and book debts; and (ii) Equitable mortgage of residential house with land underneath and appurtenant thereto measuring 01 Kanal and 14 ½ Marlas falling under Khasra Nos. 224 Min & 712 Min; Khata No. 22 Min; and Khewat No. 12 Min situate at Azad Colony, 90 Feet Road, Soura, Srinagar in estate Owanta Bhawan, Tehsil and District Srinagar in the name of the predecessor-in-interest of the Petitioners.
4. On default in repayment of the aforementioned secured debt in violation of the terms and conditions agreed between the parties, the Respondent-Bank declared the account as ‘Non-Performing Asset’ with effect from 6th of September, 2018 as per the guidelines/ directions of the Reserve Bank of India. The amount due to the Bank, as on 30th of June, 2019, was detailed out as under:-
| S. No. | Nature of Facility | Amount |
| 01. | Cash Credit | 3,79,29,115/- |
| 02. | WCTL-2016 | 40,84,648/- |
| 03. | CTL-2016 | 65,891/- |
| Total |
| 4,20,79,654/- |
5. The Petitioners were further asked to pay interest @ 12.85% with monthly rests on the aforesaid total amount of Rs. 4,20,79,654/- w.e.f. 1st of July, 2019 till the date of repayment of the dues in full.
6. Thereafter, the Respondent-Bank, while claiming to be a ‘Secured Creditor’, as defined under the provisions of the Act in respect of the amount outstanding against the predecessor-in-interest of the Petitioners, in terms of Section 13(2) of the Act, issued notice bearing No. JKB/ZOKC-1/IAPM/SRFS/2019-5236 dated 6th of July, 2019 to the Petitioners to pay to the Bank all the amount outstanding against them in the books of accounts of the Bank within its branch at SSI, Lal Chowk, Srinagar, together with interest accrued thereon w.e.f. 1st of July, 2019 along with other charges and costs incurred by the Bank from time to time and thereby discharge in full all liabilities to the Bank within a period of 60 days from the date of the notice, failing which the following measures under the provisions of the Act were stipulated to be taken for recovery of the secured debt:-
(i) Take possession of the secured assets including the right to transfer by way of lease, assig
SupremeToday
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....
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.