SURYA PRAKASH KESARWANI, JAYANT BANERJI
Asset Reconstruction Company India Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
State Of Uttar Pradesh – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
1. Heard Sri K.M. Asthana, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri B.P. Singh Kachhwah, learned standing counsel for the State-respondents.
2. On 31.03.2022, this Court passed the following order:
This writ petition has been filed praying for the following relief:
“(i) issue an appropriate writ order or direction of suitable nature, commanding the respondent Authority, the Additional District Magistrate (Fin and Rev), Gautam Budh Nagar and the Sub Divisional Magistrate Sadar, Gautam Budh Nagar to complete the process of physical possession of the immovable secured asset to the petitioner situated at House No. C-50, Sector 20, Noida, District Gautam Budh Nagar UP 201001 as per the provisions under Section 14(2) of the SARFAESI Act 2002 in compliance of the order dated 07.10.2016 passed under Section 14(1) of the Act, 2002 by the Competent Authority under the Act 2002.
(ii) Issue an appropriate writ order or direction of suitable nature, commanding the respondent no. 2, 3 & 4 to ensure actual physical possession of the immovable mortgaged property/se
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....
A District Magistrate's authority under the SARFAESI Act is administrative; subsequent orders can be made to modify the officer assigned for asset possession without it being deemed functus officio.
Possession of the secured asset can be taken by the secured creditor before confirmation of sale of the secured assets as well as post confirmation of sale.
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.