Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Rajesh Jain vs The Authorized Officer Cum Chief ... on 22 June, 2023

Author: Sushrut Arvind Dharmadhikari

Bench: Sushrut Arvind Dharmadhikari, Hirdesh

                                                                    1
                           IN      THE         HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                     AT INDORE
                                                  BEFORE
                           HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SUSHRUT ARVIND DHARMADHIKARI
                                                     &
                                      HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE HIRDESH
                                                      ON THE 22 nd OF JUNE, 2023
                                                 WRIT PETITION No. 13459 of 2023

                          BETWEEN:-
                          RAJESH JAIN S/O SHRI JAWAHAR LAL JAIN R/O 134,
                          ANJANI NAGAR INDORE (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                                       .....PETITIONER
                          (SHRI ABHINAV             MALHOTRA,           LEARNED        COUNSEL          FOR   THE
                          PETITIONER)

                          AND
                          1.     THE AUTHORIZED  OFFICER  CUM   CHIEF
                                 MANAGER INDIAN BANK 4, RNT MARG
                                 SHREEVARDHAN COMPLEX INDORE (MADHYA
                                 PRADESH)

                          2.     DISTRICT MAGISTRATE THE STATE OF MADHYA
                                 PRADESH INDORE (MADHYA PRADESH)

                          3.     NAYAB TEHSILDAR MALHARGANJ TEHSIL
                                 INDORE   COLLECTORATE   PRASHASANIK
                                 SANKOOL MOTI TABELA INDORE (MADHYA
                                 PRADESH)

                                                                                                    .....RESPONDENTS
                          (SHRI BHUVAN GAUTAM, LEARNED GOVT. ADVOCATE FOR THE
                          RESPONDENT/STATE).

                           ...............................................................................
                                 This petition coming on for admission. this day, JUSTICE SUSHRUT
                          ARVIND DHARMADHIKARI passed the following:
                                                                     ORDER

Heard on the question of admission and interim relief. This writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the petitioner against the order dated 27.03.2023 passed by the respondent no.2 for handing over possession of mortgaged property to the respondent no.1.

2. Brief facts of the case are that petitioner has taken loan to the tune of Rs. 49,00,000/- and 20,00,000/- against the security by way of equitable mortgage of property from respondent no.1/Bank which is a government bank covered under the definition of State as per Article 12 of the Constitution of India. The petitioner serviced the interest to the respondent bank. However, he was served with a demand notice dated 30.08.2021 under Section 13(2) of the SARFAESI Act by the respondent no.1/bank. The respondent no.1 later on obtained order u/S 14 of the SARFAESI Act from Additional District Magistrate, Indore. Thereafter, said actions of respondents have been challenged before the DRT, Jabalpur by filing S.A. No. 664/2022 under Section 17 of the SARFAESI Act. Due to non-functioning of DRT, the said application has not been decided yet and now the instant petition has been filed.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner's S.A No. 664/2022 u/S 17 of the SARFAESI Act is pending before the DRT since 24.07.2022 and he apprehends execution of the order passed by the respondent no. 2. He further submits that inspite of availing remedy under SARFAESI Act and approaching DRT, petitioner is left remedyless. Hence, the present petition may be allowed and the order passed by the respondent no.1 be quashed and till the application of petitioner is decided, the execution of order passed by Signature Not Verified Additional District Magistrate, Indore be kept in abeyance.

4. Learned counsel for the respondent/State opposes the prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioner.

5. Heard, learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

6. Since it is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that he has already approached DRT by filing application u/S 17(1) of the SARFAESI Act, it is pertinent to mention here that such an application shall be dealt with by the DRT as expeditiously as possible within sixty days. Section 17(5) of SARFAESI Act reads as under:

"(5) Any application made under sub‑section (1) shall be dealt with by the Debts Recovery Tribunal as expeditiously as possible and disposed of within sixty days from the date of such application: Provided that the Debts Recovery Tribunal may, from time to time, extend the said period for reasons to be recorded in writing, so, however, that the total period of pendency of the application with the Debts Recovery Tribunal, shall not exceed four months from the date of making of such application made under sub‑section (1)."

7. In view of sub-section (5) of Sec 17 of SARFAESI Act, but without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this petition is disposed of with direction to the DRT, Jabalpur to consider and decide S.A. No. 664/2022 filed by the petitioner as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of sixty days from the date of receipt of certified copy of the order passed today.

8. With the aforesaid direction, the petition is disposed of. C.C. as per rules.

                               (S. A. DHARMADHIKARI)       (HIRDESH)
                                        JUDGE                JUDGE
                          sh




Signature Not Verified
Signed by: SEHAR HASEEN
Signing time: 6/26/2023
11:09:30 AM