The SARFAESI Act prevails over any other enactment, and the secured creditor has the right to enforce its security interest without intervention of the Court.

Petitioner has filed the present petition being aggrieved by the order dated 21-3-2016 passed by Naib Tehsildar, Dhar in Miscellaneous Application No. 6/14/SARFAESI.

2. Facts of the case are as under. That Mission Vivacare Ltd. was advanced various credit facilities by the petitioner/bank. Petitioner/bank extended the facilities of foreign bill purchase, foreign bill discounting, post shipment credit in foreign currency, overdraft facility, sales invoice finance, consortium finance, export packing credit etc. The working capital facility like export packing credit was advanced by the petitioner/bank in consortium with the sub banker like SBI, State Bank of Indore, Union Bank of India, Corporation Bank, Standard Chartered Bank, Axis Bank etc. The term loan facility was extended by the bank in consortium with SBI and State Bank of Indore.

3. In order to secure the above mentioned facilities plot Nos. 16 and 14 situated in SEZ area of Dhar were mortgaged along with certain movable fixed assets.

4. On account of default in payment of loan/debt petitioner initiated recovery proceeding in respect of the secured assets which are contemplated under section 13(2) of the SARFAESI Act.

5. Petitioner filed an application before the District Magistrate on 17-6-2014 under section 14 of the SARFAESI Act seeking assistance from taking possession of the secured assets. By order dated 24-9-2014 the District Magistrate has allowed the said application by directing the SDM, district Dhar to take vacant possession of the secured assets but no action was taken then petitioner submitted applications to the District Magistrate and the SDM complaining non compliance of the order dated 13-9-2015. Finally SDM issued direction to the Naib Tehsildar vide letter dated 7-11-2015 to comply the order of the District Magistrate and obtained the possession by taking police assistance. Vide impugned order dated 21-3-2016 the Naib Tehsildar has refused to take possession and to comply the order dated 24-9-2014 on the ground that one RRC is pending for recovery of certain amount from these secured assets. The RRC issued in favour of the respondent No. 4 is already pending for recovery of certain amount from these two secured assets. Hence, petitioner has approached this Court challenging the order of the Naib Tehsildar on the ground that Naib Tehsildar has acted beyond his jurisdiction and the authority by non-complying the order of the District Magistrate. It is further submitted that the Naib Tehsildar is only required to execute the order passed by the District Magistrate and not to adjudicate the issue between the parties.

6. After notice respondents No. 1 to 3 filed return in which it is submitted that before the Registrar there were two orders for recovery of certain amount in pursuant to order passed under the SARFAESI Act as well as award passed under the Micro Small and Medium Enterprises Development Act, 2006 (for short ‘the MSMED Act’). Both the Acts are Central Acts hence the core question before the Tehsildar was that which Act would prevail. It is submitted that the MSMED Act is a special enactment having overriding effects for all Act, therefore, Tehsildar has rightly declined to act under the provisions of the SARFAESI Act.

7. Respondent No. 4 who tiled the application for intervention in this petition was permitted to be impleaded as respondent No. 4. That respondent No. 4 is a small scale industry having registered with DIC, Indore. Respondent No. 4 approached Facilitation Council under the MSMED Act and whose favour award for recovery of amount of Rs. 8394584/- including interest up to 18-7-2014 has been passed. Against the said award no appeal has been preferred, therefore, the said amount is liable to be recovered by way of RRC through Collector. While executing the said decree it came to the knowledge of the Tehsildar that there is an order passed by the District Magistrate under the SARFAESI Act. In order to remove the confusion respondent