Allahabad High Court
Bank Of Baroda vs Beena Verma And 4 Others on 19 February, 2021
Bench: Mahesh Chandra Tripathi, Sanjay Kumar Pachori
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ? Court No. - 21 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 4925 of 2021 Petitioner :- Bank Of Baroda Respondent :- Beena Verma And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Vijay Prakash Mishra Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J.
Hon'ble Sanjay Kumar Pachori,J.
Heard Sri Vijay Prakash Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner-Bank, learned Standing Counsel for the State-Respondent No. 4, and Sri Manoj Kumar Kushwaha, learned counsel for the private respondents.
Present petition is being preferred by the petitioner for the following reliefs:-
"i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent no.5 to decide the application u/s 14 of the Secularization and Reconstruction of Security Interest Act, 2002 registered as Misc. Case No. 4497 of 2019 (Bank of Baroda Vs. Beena Verma and others)."
Record in question reflects that the petitioner-Bank had sanctioned a term loan/housing loan of Rs. 12,50,000/- to the private respondent nos.1 to 3 and the plot in dispute was mortgaged with the petitioner-Bank. The loan document was executed by the respondent nos. 1 to 3 to secure the loan facility. They had committed defaults in repayment of the loan amount and consequently, their accounts were declared as 'Non-Performing Assets' by the petitioner-Bank. A notice under Section 13(2) of the Secularization and Reconstruction of Security Interest Act, 2002 (in short, SARFAESI Act) was issued to the private respondents on 06.11.2018 to pay sum of Rs.11,93,546/- as on 31.10.2018 and further un-applied interest and expenses from 01.11.2018 till actual payment. Thereafter, the petitioner-Bank proceeded under Section 13(4) of the SARFAESI Act and took symbolic possession of the mortgaged property on 11.6.2019 but physical possession has not been taken. The possession notice was published in the newspaper. The petitioner filed an application under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act before the respondent no. 5/Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Kanpur Nagar on 15.07.2019 for appointing a receiver to take the possession of the secured assets/House No.B-861, Awas Vikas Hanspuram Yojana-2, Naubasta, Kanpur Nagar area 30 sq. mtr. and hand over the possession of same to the petitioner. The case was registered as Misc. Case No. 4497 of 2019, under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act, 2002 in the Court of Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Kanpur Nagar but the respondent no. 5 is not taking any heed to decide the application under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act.
In this backdrop, learned counsel for the petitioner-Bank submits that the respondent no. 5 is bound to pass suitable order for the purpose of taking possession of the secured assets within a period of 30 days from the date of filing of the application, whereas the proceedings are pending since the year 2019 and the same may be directed to be decided expeditiously.
Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act mandates District Magistrate to deliver possession of a secured asset within 30 days, extendable to an aggregate of 60 days upon reasons recorded in writing, to banks.The SARFAESI Act was enacted to provide a machinery for empowering banks and financial institutions, so that they may have the power to take possession of secured assets and to sell them. The Debt Recovery Tribunals Act was first enacted to streamline the recovery of public dues but the proceedings under that law have not given desirous results and consequently the SARFAESI Act was enacted. The purpose of the Act pertains to the speedy recovery of dues, by banks and financial institutions.Keeping the objective of the Act in mind, the time limit to take action by the District Magistrate has been fixed to impress upon the authority to take possession of the secured assets. The time limit is to instill a confidence in creditors that the District Magistrate will make an attempt to deliver possession as well as to impose a duty on the District Magistrate to make an earnest effort to comply with the mandate of the statute to deliver the possession within 30 days and for reasons to be recorded within 60 days, it held.
In the facts and circumstances, we are of the considered opinion that the application under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act registered as Misc. Case No. 4497 of 2019 (Bank of Baroda Vs. Beena Verma and others) is to be decided as per aforesaid provision without any further delay.
Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of with the direction to the respondent no. 5 to decide the aforementioned application of the petitioner-Bank strictly in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible and preferably within 30 days from the date of production of a copy of this order before him but certainly after affording opportunity to all stakeholders in the matter.
The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad, self attested by the petitioner alongwith a self attested identity proof of the said person (preferably Aadhar Card) mentioning the mobile number to which the said Aadhar Card is linked.
The concerned Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.
Order Date :- 19.2.2021 Ishan/A.K.Srivastava