SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2024 Supreme(Mad) 2558

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
D.KRISHNAKUMAR, P.B.BALAJI, JJ.
M/s. Tamilnadu Mercantile Bank Ltd. - Appellant 
Versus 
The Sub Registrar - Respondent 
W.P.No. 15451 of 2024
Decided on : 19-10-2024


Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : Mr.V.Chandrasekaran
For the Respondent:Mr.M.Habeeb Rahman Government Advocate, Mr.Haja Naziruddin, Additional Advocate General Assisted by Mr.G.Nanmaran Special Government Pleader

Secured creditors under SARFAESI Act have priority over all other debts, including tax attachments, affirming the necessity of registering Sale Certificates in favor of auction purchasers.

Headnote:(A) Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 - Sections 13(2) and 26E - Writ of Mandamus sought directing registration of Sale Certificate and deletion of entry in Certificate of Encumbrance - Petitioner claimed priority over attachments due to prior mortgage evidenced by registered document - Court held that debts due to secured creditors have priority over all other debts, including attachments - Registration of Sale Certificate ordered, and entry reflecting cancellation of attachment required in Encumbrance Certificate. (Paras 8, 15, 20, 22)

(B) Cancellation of Encumbrance - No provision in Registration Act to delete entry, but Registrar must reflect cancellation of attachment in Encumbrance Records. (Paras 21, 22)

Facts of the case:
The Bank sought to register a Sale Certificate after selling mortgaged property due to loan defaults. The Sub-Registrar refused registration, citing existing tax attachments.

Findings of Court:
The court affirmed the priority of secured creditors and required the Sub-Registrar to register the Sale Certificate and cancel the conflicting attachment.

Issues: Priority of secured creditors vs. existing government attachments; authority of Sub-Registrar to refuse registration.

Ratio Decidendi: The court confirmed that under Section 26E, secured creditors’ claims take precedence over attachments.

Result: Writ Petition Allowed.

Table of Content
1. writ petition seeks mandamus for property registration post mortgage. (Para 1 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6)
2. court evaluates secured creditor's priority per sarfaesi. (Para 8 , 14 , 15)
3. priority of payment under sarfaesi act affirmed by court. (Para 9 , 19)
4. arguments highlight banks' due diligence and its implications. (Para 10 , 12 , 13)
5. court orders registration of sale certificate and deletion of attachment. (Para 18 , 21 , 22)

ORDER :

P.B. BALAJI, J.

The Petitioner Bank has sought issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the Sub-Registrar, Sembakkam, to delete the property mentioned in the schedule to the Writ Petition from the Certificate of Encumbrance and to direct the 1st respondent to register the Sale Certificate dated 04.10.2023 issued by the petitioner Bank.

2 .We have heard Mr. V. Chandrasekaran, learned counsel for the writ Petitioner and Mr. Haja Naziruddin, learned Additional Advocate General, assisted by Mr.G.Nanmaran, learned Special Government Pleader for the 2nd respondent and Mr.M.Habeeb Rahman, learned Government Advocate for the 1st Respondent.

3. According to the learned counsel for the Petitioner Bank, the property which is set out by way of a separate schedule to the Writ Petition was mortgaged by one A.Seyathu, partner of M/s. Friends Telecom in favor of the Petitioner Bank on 12.11.2015, by an agreement of deposit of title deeds. This mortgage was created in respect of credit facilities availed by the partnership firm, M/s. Friends Telecom. The memorandum of deposit of title deeds was duly registered as Document No.12332 of 2015 on the file of Sub Registrar Office, Selayur as well. The property was also registered under Section 26D of Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act (SARFAESI), 2002, on 21.11.2015.

4. It is the case of the Petitioner Bank that the said loan availed by M/s. Friends Telecom became a non-performing asset on 31.03.2021 and consequently the Petitioner Bank invoked the provisions of the SARFAESI Act, 2002, and issued notice under Section 13(2) on 16.09.2021, calling upon the borrower to pay a sum of Rs.17,51,657.85, together with future interest at 11% with monthly rests and also penal interest at the rate of 2% per annum.

5. The specific case of the writ Petitioner Bank is that the subject property of the said mortgage was sold in public auction on 31.08.2023 in favor of Mrs. Kala Ramu, resident of Tambaram for a sum of Rs. 28,60,000/- and that the said auction purchaser had fully complied with the terms and conditions of the auction sale by remitting the entire consideration on 27.09.2023. On receipt of the said amount, the loan account was closed on the very same day i.e., 27.09.2023 and subsequently, a Sale Certificate was issued to the auction purchaser, Mrs. Kala Ramu on 04.10.2023.

6. It is also the case of the Petitioner Bank that after adjusting the sale proceeds towards the loan account, there was a surplus of Rs. 1,66,093.31/- and by way of a demand draft bearing No.776296, the same was issued in favour of the 2nd respondent, the Assistant Commissioner, Commercial Taxes Department, Tambaram Assessment Circle.

7. The grievance of the Petitioner Bank is that the 1st respondent Sub Registrar has refused to register the sale certificate citing the priority of charge in favour of the 2nd respondent, the Assistant Commissioner, Commercial Taxes Department, Tambaram Assessment Circle.

8. According to Mr.V.Chandrasekaran, the SARFAESI Act, 2002, gives priority to banks in respect of its dues over all other debts including revenue, taxes, cesses or other rates which may be due and payable to either the State Government, Local Authority or the Central Government.

9. The learned counsel would invite our attention to Section 26E of the SARFAESI Act, 2002, the same is extracted hereunder:

“Section 26E : Priority to secured creditors.

Notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force, after the regi

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top