30.04.2025 Sl. No.2 akd W. P. A. 7445 of 2023 (CAN 1 of 2025)

[Central Bank of India -Vs- Union of India & Ors.]

Mr. Devajyoti Barman Mr. Sudhir Kumar Senapati Ms. Sanjukta Basu Mallick … … for the petitioner Mr. Dhiraj Trivedi .. Sr. Advocate Mr. Subhajit Chatterjee Mr. Rudra Dev Bagchi Ms. Swapna Jha Mr. Bikash Singh … … for respondent no.5 Mr. Ayan Kumar Boral Mr. Debabrati Basu Roy … for respondent nos.4A to 4D

1. In the present writ petition, the petitioner-Bank challenges the order dated 02.02.2023 passed by the Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal at Kolkata (DRAT) in Appeal No.263 of 2018 whereby the learned DRAT confirmed the order dated 01.10.2018 passed by the learned Debts Recovery Tribunal 1, Kolkata (DRT) in S.A. 158 of 2015. By the said order, the learned DRT had quashed the order dated 23.07.2015 passed by the learned District Magistrate under Section 14 of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘SARFAESI Act’). Though the learned DRAT found that the reasoning of the DRT was faulty, it nevertheless proceeded to confirm the order of the DRT on a different ground.

Facts of the case:-

2. The petitioner-Bank had sanctioned a house building loan of Rs.6,00,000/- in favour of the respondent no.4 (now deceased), against the mortgage of immovable property situated at Premises No.56/3/3, Jay Narayan Babu Ananda Dutta Lane, P.S. Bantra, Dist. Howrah. Thereafter, M/s Howrah Light Steel Casting, a partnership firm represented by one of its partner namely Sri Partha Mondal (respondent no. 4) availed the loan/credit facilities of Rs. 8, 00,000/- under Cash Credit Account from the petitioner Bank for business and said credit facility was sanctioned by the petitioner Bank vide letter of Sanction dated 09.03.2009. The said loan accounts were not serviced regularly, as a result, were classified as Non-performing Assets (NPA) by the petitioner-Bank.

3. Consequently, a demand notice under Section 13(2) of the SARFAESI Act was issued on 19.01.2012. No objection to the said notice was either filed by the borrower or by the guarantor. Thereafter, possession notice under Section 13(4) of the SARFAESI Act was issued on 12.07.2012, which was duly published in newspapers. Subsequently, the petitioner-Bank obtained a valuation report of the secured assets from their empanelled valuer. Thereafter, a sale notice was published on 30.03.2014 in two leading newspapers i.e. The Times of India and Aajkaal involving the auction of the mortgaged property. A copy of the newspaper notice was also served upon the borrower. Pursuant thereto, the auction sale was confirmed in favour of respondent no.5 viz. Smt. Bhagabati Ojha for a total sale consideration of Rs.25,35,000/- and a sale certificate was issued in her favour on 30.05.2014. Neither the borrower nor the guarantor have challenged the possession notice and said e-

auction sale notice dated 30.03.2014 within the limitation period.

Accordingly, the loan account was closed.

4. The petitioner-Bank in accordance with the provisions of Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act, 2002 filed an application before the District Magistrate, seeking assistance for taking physical possession of the secured asset. Upon consideration of the said application, the learned District Magistrate was pleased to pass order dated 23.07.2015 directing taking of physical possession of the secured asset in favour of the petitioner-Bank.

The said order reads as follows :-

“The Authorised Officer of the Central Bank of India, South Regional Office, 33, Netaji Subhas Road, Kolkata – 700001 secured creditor, submitted an application to the undersigned praying for taking over possession of secured property under Section 14 of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (SARFAESI Act). It appears on scrutiny of documents submitted with the application that the said Bank sanctioned a cash credi