SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Online)(All) 2634

ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
Rajesh Singh Chauhan, J
Bank of Baroda v. State of U.P.


Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Sri Manish Mishra
For the Respondents: Additional Counsel

Table of Content
1. timely disposal of applications under s.14 of the sarfaesi act. (Para 1 , 2)
2. highlights delays due to lack of representation. (Para 3)
3. court emphasizes the ministerial nature of s.14 proceedings. (Para 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9)
4. no notice required to borrower or third parties under s.14. (Para 10 , 11 , 12)
5. supreme court affirms high court decision regarding s.14. (Para 14 , 15 , 16)
6. s.14 proceedings do not involve adjudicatory process. (Para 19)
7. order for timely disposal and implementation of s.14 orders. (Para 28 , 29 , 30)

1. Heard.

2. Yet another petition under Art.226 of the Constitution of India by a Bank seeking disposal of its application under S.14 of the SARFAESI Act, 2002 (the Act, 2002) which has remained pending before the District Magistrate, Amethi since 2022. Every day such petitions are filed before this Court where Banks or financial institutions seek disposal of their applications filed under S.14 of the Act, 2002 which have remained pending for long. The very purpose of having a separate procedure for recovery of loan etc. under the Act, 2002 and providing a separate forum for adjudication of disputes was that such matters were to be exp

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top