Gujarat High Court
Dena Bank vs District Magistrate & on 8 September, 2016
Author: S.H.Vora
Bench: S.H.Vora
C/SCA/1844/2016 ORDER
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1844 of 2016
===========================================================
DENA BANK....Petitioner(s)
Versus
DISTRICT MAGISTRATE & 1....Respondent(s)
================================================================
Appearance:
MR SS PANESAR, ADVOCATE for the Petitioner(s) No. 1
MS. ASMITA PATEL, AGP, for the Respondent(s) No. 1
NOTICE SERVED for the Respondent(s) No. 1
NOTICE SERVED BY DS for the Respondent(s) No. 2
================================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.H.VORA
Date : 08/09/2016
ORAL ORDER
[1] By way of present petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner challenges the order dated 26.10.2015 and 01.01.2016 passed by respondent No.1.
[2] Upon hearing of learned advocate Mr.S.S.Panesar, appearing for the petitioner and considering the impugned orders annexed at Annexure-A, it appears that the learned District Magistrate, Bharuch declined the application preferred under Section 14 of the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (hereinafter referred to as "SARFAESI Act" for short) mainly on the ground that the petitioner has not produced any evidence as to disposal of Securitization Application No.12 of 2009. But vide communication dated 17.11.2015, the petitioner has forwarded copy of order of S.A. No.12 of 2009 dated 11.05.2015 to the respondent No.1 under letter No.DB/RB/Rajat/26/2015 dated 17.06.2015. However, the respondent No.1 failed to consider it.
[3] Under the circumstances, it appears that though the Page 1 of 2 HC-NIC Page 1 of 2 Created On Sat Sep 10 02:35:19 IST 2016 C/SCA/1844/2016 ORDER respondent No.1 was provided with the copy of S.A. No.12 of 2009, it failed to take into consideration the said order and thus, passed the impugned order dated 26.10.2015. Therefore, the respondent No.1 committed serious error in refusing to exercise its power under Section-14 of the SARFAESI Act and therefore, present petition requires to be accepted partly and accordingly, present petition is hereby partly allowed with a direction to the respondent No.1 to decide the application dated 02.06.2015 afresh and pass appropriate order after hearing the present petitioner and other affected parties in accordance with law. The respondent No.1 is further directed to expedite the hearing of application dated 02.06.2015 since huge amount of the petitioner is involved in the subject matter of proceedings and shall decide the same within one month from the date of receipt of copy of this order.
[4] With this observation and direction, present petition is partly allowed. Direct service is permitted.
(S.H.VORA, J.) siddharth Page 2 of 2 HC-NIC Page 2 of 2 Created On Sat Sep 10 02:35:19 IST 2016