Back
2024 Supreme(Online)(DEL) 13018
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Vikas Mahajan, J
CHOLAMANDALAM INVESTMENT AND FINANCE COMPANY LTD. – Appellant
Versus
SHAM SINGH & ANR. – Respondent
CRL.M.C. 2854/2024
SIDHARTH CHOPRA
The Chief Metropolitan Magistrate exceeded authority by ordering restoration of possession beyond the scope of the initial directive, which only permitted possession of the ground floor.
Headnote:(A) Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 - Section 14 - Petition against order directing restoration of possession of property - The Chief Metropolitan Magistrate directed the receiver to restore possession of the first, second, and third floors, which was beyond the scope of the earlier order that permitted possession of only the ground floor. (Paras 3, 4, 5)
(B) Review of Orders - The petitioner contended that the impugned order effectively reviewed the earlier order, which was not permissible. (Paras 4, 5)
Facts of the case:
The petition was filed against an order directing the receiver to restore possession of multiple floors of a property, which the petitioner argued exceeded the authority granted in a prior order.
Findings of Court:
The court issued notice to the respondents and directed the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate to postpone the hearing under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act.
Issues: The main issues were whether the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate exceeded his authority in restoring possession and the implications of reviewing prior orders.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized that the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate's order was beyond the scope of the earlier directive, which only allowed possession of the ground floor.
Result: Petition allowed, subject to exceptions.
1. Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.
CRL.M.A. 10871/2024 (exemption)
2. Application stands disposed of.
3. The present petition has been filed against the impugned order dated 04.04.2024 passed by learned Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, West, Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi in the case entitled “Cholamandalam Investment & Finance Ltd. Vs. Sham Singh” bearing CIS no. 1928/2023 whereby the learned Chief Metropolitan Magistrate has directed the receiver to forthwith restore the possession of first floor, second floor and third floor of the property in question on the ground that the receiver had been directed only to take physical possession of the secured asset i.e. Ground Floor with terrace floor/roof rights of the area admeasuring 51.1/4 Sq. Yds., bearing No. G-2, out of Khasra No. 30/11, situated in the area of Village Khyala, in CRL.M.C. 2854/2024 & CRL.M.A. 10870/2024 (stay) the abadi known as Vishnu Garden, New Delhi.
4. The learned senior counsel for the petitioner submits that once the direction had been given by the learned Chief Metropolitan Magistrate and the same have been executed by the learned receiver, the present impugned order could not have been passed in as much as the same tantamounts to reviewing the earlier order dated 09.01.2024.
5. He further submits that the order dated 09.01.2024 passed by the learned Chief Metropolitan Magistrate was also challenged by the subsequent purchasers of the property under Section 17 of the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (SARFAESI Act) by filing SA No. 57/2024.
6. In the said SA, interim application seeking stay of the operation of 09.01.2024, order was also prayed for. However, the said application was dismissed by the learned DRT vide order dated 19.02.2024.
7. In view of the above, issue notice to the respondents by all permissible modes, returnable on 20.05.2024.
8. In the meanwhile, the learned Chief Metropolitan Magistrate is directed to postpone the date of hearing in the proceedings under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act, 2002 after the next date fixed before this Court.
9. Order dasti under signatures of the Court Master.
