NKGSB Cooperative Bank Limited vs Subir Chakravarty

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2022 Supreme(SC) 168

A. M. KHANWILKAR, C. T. RAVIKUMAR
NKGSB Cooperative Bank Limited – Appellant
Versus
Subir Chakravarty – Respondent

Advocates appeared:
For the Petitioner(s):Mr. Viraj Kadam, Adv Mr. Soumya Dutta, AOR Mr. Devendra Kumar Singh, Adv. Mr. Karunakar Mahalik, AOR Mr. Gouranga Biswal, Adv. Mr. Manoranjan Mishra, Adv. Mr. B. Raghunath, Advocate Mr. Sriram P., Advocate on Record Ms. Kavitha M.C., Advocate Ms. Muskaan Garg, Advocate Ms. Prerna Robin, Advocate Mr. Sreenath S., Advocate Mr. Mukund P. Unni, Advocate Mr. Sriram P., AOR Ms. Daisy Hannah, AOR Mr. Manish Shanker Srivastava, Adv. Ms. Kalpana, Adv. Ms. Pallavi Baghel, Adv. Mr. Abhishek Kumar Singh, AOR
For the Respondent(s): Mr. M.L. Ganesh, Adv. Mr. K. V. Vijayakumar, AOR Mr. Rana Mukherjee, Sr. Adv. Ms. Daisy Hannah, AOR Ms. Kanika Sharma, Adv. Ms. Surabhi Guleria, Adv. Ms. Oindrila Sen, Adv. Mr. Rahul Chitnis, Adv. Mr. Sachin Patil, AOR. Mr. Aaditya A. Pande, Adv Mr. Geo Joseph, Adv. Ms. Shwetal Shepal, Adv.

Judgement Key Points

The Court emphasized that Section 14 of the relevant legislation is primarily a procedural provision that facilitates the secured creditor’s ability to take possession of secured assets. It clarified that the process under Section 14 is not an adjudicatory or judicial determination of the rights or points raised by the borrower. Instead, it is a ministerial and administrative step that involves the execution of the secured creditor’s request for possession, subject to certain procedural formalities (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!)

JUDGMENT :

A.M. KHANWILKAR, J.

1. The seminal question involved in these cases is: whether it is open to the District Magistrate¹ [for short “DM”] or the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate ² [for short “CMM”] to appoint an advocate and authorise him/her to take possession of the secured assets and documents relating thereto and to forward the same to the secured creditor within the meaning of Section 14(1A) of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act 2002? ³ [for short “2002 Act”].

2. The High Court of Judicature at Bombay⁴ [for short “Bombay High Court”] vide judgment and order dated 6.11.2019 in Writ Petition (L) No. 28480 of 2019 opined that the advocate, not being a subordinate officer to the CMM or DM, such appointment would be illegal. Against this decision, four separate appeals⁵ [Civil Appeal No.........of 2022, SLP (Civil) No. 30240 of 2019; Civil Appeal No.........of 2022, SLP (Civil) No. 2055 of 2020; Civil Appeal No.........of 2022, SLP (Civil) No.........of 2022, Diary No. 17059 of 2020 and Civil Appeal No.........of 2022, SLP (Civil) No.........of 2022, Diary No. 23733 of 2020] have been filed by the concerned parties.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2022 Supreme(SC) 168

A. M. KHANWILKAR, C. T. RAVIKUMARNKGSB Cooperative Bank Limited – AppellantVersusSubir Chakravarty – Respondent

Cases Referred (25)

A. M. KHANWILKAR, C. T. RAVIKUMAR
NKGSB Cooperative Bank Limited – Appellant
Versus
Subir Chakravarty – Respondent