JUDGMENT

G.S. Sandhawalia, J. (Oral) - CM-7667-CWP-2023

Application for placing on record short reply on behalf of respondent Nos.3 and 4 alongwith Annexures R/1 to R/10 is allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

The same are taken on record.

CWP-7636-CWP-2023

Application has been filed by M/s. Anubhav Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., the auction purchaser under Order 1, Rule 10 (2) read with section 151 CPC for being impleaded as respondent No.5 on the ground that property was purchased by him on 31.01.2022 and on account of the fact that there was an interim order in CWP No. 2453 of 2022, the bank could not confirm the sale and issue the sale certificate.

Accordingly, the application is allowed.

M/s. Anubhav Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. is impleaded as respondent No.5.

CWP-12171-2022 (O & M)

Prayer made in the present writ petition filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India is to re-deliver the possession of the rice mill/factory land and building measuring 19 kanals and 8 marlas and the residential house-cum-shop measuring 10 marlas which was stated to be illegally taken into possession by the bank. The ground which has been canvassed is that the order passed by the District Magistrate on 21.04.2022 (Annexure P-9) under Section 14 of the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (in short 'the Act') and the subsequent possession which was taken on 26.04.2022 is a non-speaking order and in contravention of the orders passed by the Division Bench of this Court in Allahabad Bank v. District Magistrate, Ludhiana and others, 2021 (4) RCR (Civil) 571.

2. The argument raised by counsel for the petitioners is that the procedure prescribed and even the application filed under Section 14 of the Act was not as per statutory provisions as such.

3. The argument, at the first blush, may sound attractive but the fact remains that the petitioners have chosen not to challenge the principle proceedings prescribed under the Act under Sections 13 (2) and 13(4) respectively in the present writ petition. Apparently on 25.05.2021 (Annexure P-1), the demand was made of Rs.43,58,20,551.64/- and the six mortgaged properties were duly depicted including property mearsuring 19 kanals 8 marlas, which is now stated to have been sold by way of auction to M/s. Anubhav Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. (now impleaded as respondent No.5) for a sum of Rs.9.73 crores. However, on account of the fact that there was an interim order in CWP No. 2453 of 2022, the bank could not confirm the sale and issue the sale certificate. It is not disputed that the said order has been duly vacated on 29.03.2023, which has also been placed on record by the bank as Annexur R-7 alongwith the reply filed by the bank by way of CM- 7667-CWP-2023. Photocopies of sale certificate dated 05.04.2023 issued under Rule 7(2) for the movable properties and for the immovable properties have also been placed on record. As noticed, notice under Section 13 (4) of the Act is dated 06.09.2021 (Annexure P-4).

4. The law stands crystalized by a number of judgments of the Apex Court, the latest being in SLP No. 22021-22022 of 2022, M/s. South Indian Bank Ltd. and others v. Naveen Mathew Philip and another decided on 17.04.2023 wherein, it has been specifically held that the right as such of the borrower is to file a securitization application under Section 17 of the Act against any of the measures resorted to under Section 13 (4) so that the Tribunal can examine whether the same are in accordance with the provisions of the Act and the Rules. The Tribunal has been vested w