Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR
SANJEEV SACHDEVA, VINAY SARAF
Punjab Nation Bank – Appellant
Versus
Additional District Magistrate, Raisen – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner's challenged order on property possession. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. arguments regarding rights of secured creditor. (Para 3 , 4) |
| 3. analysis on legal standing of secured creditor. (Para 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 20) |
| 4. court establishes pivotal legal standards. (Para 21) |
| 5. final ruling on the petition. (Para 22 , 23) |
ORDER :
Sanjeev Sachdeva, J.
1. Petitioner-Punjab National Bank impugns an order dated 27.05.2024 passed by the Collector, Raisen wherein the application filed by the Bank under Section 14 of Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (for brevity 'Act') has been dismissed by the Collector.
2. The Collector by the impugned order dated 27.05.2024 has held that during examination of the application, it is found that the Bank has already issued a sale certificate and since the Bank has already issued the sale certificate, it is not entitled to seek physical possession of the secured asset.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that physical possession of the secured asset had continued with the borrower and; as such, the sale certificate did not transfer
A secured creditor retains the right to seek possession of secured assets even after issuing a sale certificate without physical possession, and the relevant authority acts ministerially under Sectio....
Remedy of appeal under Section 17(1) of the SARFAESI Act is not available to secured creditors against District Magistrate orders but only to aggrieved parties.
The jurisdiction of the Civil Court is completely barred in so far as those matters, which would fall for adjudication within the jurisdiction of the Tribunal.
The court established that the executing authority under the Securitization Act must comply with orders for possession and cannot raise disputes regarding the secured asset.
The court established that magistrates must assist secured creditors in enforcing possession orders under the Securitization Act without adjudicating disputes over the legitimacy of the claims.
The Court clarified the jurisdiction of the Chief Judicial Magistrate under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act, holding that both the District Magistrate and Chief Judicial Magistrate have the jurisdicti....
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....
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
