2025 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 21353
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Mrs. Justice J. Nisha Banu, Mrs. Justice S. Srimathy, JJ
M/s.City Union Bank Limited – Appellant
Versus
The District Registrar – Respondent
W.P.(MD)No.13566 of 2024
Mr.V.Sukumar, Mr.N.Ramesh Government Advocate
Secured creditors have priority over other claims, including those from the Income Tax Department, as established under Section 26E of the SARFAESI Act.
Headnote:(A) SARFAESI Act, 2002 - Section 2(zc) and Section 26E - Writ of Mandamus - Petition filed to remove illegal attachment entries in encumbrance certificate - Petitioner bank had first charge over property due to prior registration of mortgage - Court held that secured creditors have priority over other claims, including those from the Income Tax Department - Impugned attachment orders quashed. (Paras 2, 4, 5, 6)
(B) Priority of Secured Creditors - The court reaffirmed that secured creditors have a priority charge over other creditors, including decrees of the Court, as established in previous judgments. (Paras 5, 6)
Facts of the case:
The petitioner bank sought to remove attachment entries from the encumbrance certificate related to a property mortgaged for loans availed by respondents 3 to 5. The property was sold at auction, but attachment entries were found in favor of a third party, which the bank argued were illegal.
Findings of Court:
The court found that the petitioner bank had a first charge over the property due to the prior registration of the mortgage and directed the removal of the attachment entries.
Issues: The main issues were whether the attachment orders were valid given the bank's prior charge and the priority of secured creditors under the SARFAESI Act.
Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the petitioner bank's mortgage was registered before the attachment orders, thus granting it priority under Section 26E of the SARFAESI Act.
Result: Writ petition allowed.
Legal Category Hierarchy
-
property law
-
mortgages and charges
-
secured transactions
- priority of charges
-
attachment and sequestration
- attachment orders
-
secured transactions
-
mortgages and charges
-
banking law
-
secured lending
- non-performing assets
- enforcement of security interests
-
secured lending
-
civil procedure
-
writ jurisdiction
- mandamus
- arbitration and injunctions
-
writ jurisdiction
ORDER
(Order of the Court was delivered by S.SRIMATHY, J.
The present writ petition is filed for Writ of Mandamus, to direct the respondents 1 and 2 to efface/delete the impugned attachment entry in the encumbrance certificate relating to the property in Re-Survey No.50/4A measuring to an extent of 8.300 cent Aloor B Village, Kalkulam Taluk, Kanyakumari District, registered as Document No.8 of 2021, dated 17.03.2021 and Document No.29 of 2024, dated 24.04.2024, on the file of the 2nd respondent within reasonable time period fixed by this Court by considering the petitioner's representation, dated 14.06.2024.
2. The brief facts are that the respondent 3 to 5 had availed the below detailed loan facilities from the petitioner bank:
| Nature of Loan facility | Amount Sanctioned in Rs. | Date when availed | Account Numbers |
| Secured OD Without DP | 40,00,000/- | 20.08.2016 | 512120020009526 |
| CUB OSL Term EMI-Br | 2,72,00,000/- | 31.12.2019 | 501812080059763 |
| Emergency Credit Line | 60,00,000/- | 31.10.2020 | 501812080075927 |
| Total | Rs. 3,72,00,000/- |
The property in R.S.No.50/4A measuring to an extent of 8.300 cents in Aloor B Village, Kalkulam Taluk, Kanyakumari District belongs to respondents 3 to 5 and they created the valid equitable mortgages for the above said loan facilities and executed Memorandum of Deposit of Title Deeds in Document No. 2892 of 2016, dated 26.07.2016, Document No.5542 of 2019, dated 31.12.2019 and Document No. 4048 of 2020, dated 31.10.2020 which are registered before the 2nd respondent in favour of the petitioner bank, thereafter it became “secured assets” under Section 2 (zc) of the SARPAESI Act. The respondents 3 to 5 defaulted in repayment, hence the accounts were classified as Non-performing Asset (NPA) on 21.10.2022, then the petitioner bank issued a demand notice on 21.02.2023 under Section 13(2) for Rs. 4,07,55,140/- (Rupees Four Crore Seven Lakh Fifty Five Thousand One Hundred and Forty only) as on 07.02.2023. Thereafter, possession notice, dated 30.05.2023 under Section 13(4) was issued for a sum of Rs. 4,22,44,551/- (Rupees Four Crore Twenty Two Lakhs Forty Four Thousand Five Hundred and Fifty One only) as on 16.05.2023 along with further interest, costs and charges, etc. and took symbolic possession of the property. The petitioner bank has issued a Tender cum Auction Sale Notice, dated 30.03.2024, the 7th respondent became the successful bidder in the Re-Tender cum Auction conducted on 17.04.2024 and purchased the property for a sum of Rs. 1,10,05,000/- (Rupees One Crore Ten Lakhs and Five Thousand only). The petitioner bank issued a sale confirmation, dated 17.04.2024 and sale certificate on 21.05.2024. While registering the sale certificate it came to the knowledge there are attachment entries in favour of the 6th respondent namely M/s. Shriram Finance Limited and the same are reflecting in the encumbrance certificate. The petitioner bank verified the encumbrance certificate and found entries of registered Document No. 8 of 2021, dated 17.03.2021 and Document No. 29 of 2024, dated 21.04.2024. Before such entry the petitioner bank was not issued with any communication or notice or opportunity of hearing. The contention of the petitioner bank is that with an intention to defeat the interest of the bank the 6th respondent had filed Arbitration Case No.4 of 2021 and Arbitration Case No.12 of 2024 and obtained attachment orders in favour of the 6th respondent in I.A.No.1 of 2021 and I.A.No.1 of 2024 respectively. The said impugned attachment entries are per se illegal, unlawful and arbitrary and are not supported by any statutory provisions. The 7th respondent submitted a representation, dated 03.06.2024, requesting the bank to clear the above said attachment entries before registering the sale certificate in his favour. Hence the petitioner bank submitted detailed representation, dated 14.06.2024, before the respondents 1 and 2 / authorities to remove the said attachment entries in the encumbrance certificate, wherein it is stated the act of the cre