Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW BENCH
SUBHASH VIDYARTHI
Tandon and Company – Appellant
Versus
Debt. Recovery Tribunal – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
SUBHASH VIDYARTHI, J.
1. Heard Sri Devesh Srivastava and Sri Gautam Sadana, the learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri Manu Dixit, the learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 - HDFC Bank Ltd. and perused the records.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioners have stated that they have erroneously impleaded the DRT as opposite party no.1 to the petition. On their oral request they are permitted to strike out the name of Tribunal from the array of opposite parties in the memo of petition forthwith.
3. By means of the instant petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India the petitioners have challenged the validity of an order dated 10.11.2025, passed by the Debts Recovery Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as ‘the DRT’) in Securitisation Application No.936 of 2024, whereby the DRT has rejected the contention of the petitioner about illegality of an order dated 28.06.2025, passed by the District Magistrate, Lucknow in Case No.1414 of 2025, under Section 14 of Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Securities Interest Act, 2002 (hereinafter referred to as the SARFAESI Act) correcting a typographical error in the previous or
The District Magistrate can correct typographical errors in orders under the SARFAESI Act without that being a review; appeals must be filed under Section 18 if available.
Duty of Magistrate under Section 14 of SARFAESI Act is only to ascertain whether secured assets fall within his jurisdiction and to verify from bank or financial institutions whether notice under Sec....
The District Magistrate is not required to grant an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners while examining applications filed by secured creditors under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act, 2002. The p....
Point of law : As per the settled law, duty of Chief Metropolitan Magistrate (CMM)/District Magistrate (DM) under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act is only to ascertain whether the secured assets fall w....
While expressing the aforesaid view, we are conscious that the powers conferred upon the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution to issue to any person or authority, including in appropriate....
District Magistrate's role under S.14 of the SARFAESI Act is purely administrative with no adjudicatory powers, upholding the law's constitutionality and confirming the permissibility of judicial rev....
The District Magistrate's role under section 14 of the SARFAESI Act is ministerial and does not involve adjudication on the merits of the claim. The Magistrate's satisfaction with the information pro....
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.
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
