Madras High Court
M.Palanikumar vs The District Collector on 7 July, 2015
Bench: S.Manikumar, G.Chockalingam
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 07.07.2015
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.MANIKUMAR
and
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.CHOCKALINGAM
W.P.(MD).No.20714 of 2014
&
M.P.(MD).Nos.2 and 3 of 2014
1.M.Palanikumar
2.P.Selvi
3.M.Virumayee Ammal .. Petitioners
versus
1.The District Collector,
Madurai District,
Madurai.
2.The Tahsildar,
Thirupparankundram Taluk,
Madurai.
3.The Deputy Tahsildar
Thirupparankundram Taluk,
Madurai.
4.The Authorised Officer,
State Bank of India,
Kappalur Branch,
Madurai. .. Respondents
Prayer
Writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to
issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records pertaining to
the proceedings of the 1st respondent in ROC No.3/24286/2014, dated
10.10.2014 and the consequential order dated 03.12.2014 of the Deputy
Tahsildar, Thirupparankundram Taluk acting on behalf of the 2nd respondent
and quash the same and direct the respondents to handover the possession of
the schedule mentioned properties to the petitioners.
!For Petitioner : Mr.S.Suresh
^For respondents : Mr.N.Manohar for R1 to R3
Special Government pleader
Mr.ARM. Ramesh
:ORDER
(Order of the Court was made by S.MANIKUMAR ,J.) Proceedings of the District Collector, Madurai District, ROC No.3/24286/2014, dated 10.10.2014, sought to be quashed, reads as follows:-
?In reference cited, the Authorised Officer/Chief Manager, State Bank of India, Kappalur Branch, Madurai has made a representation to the Collector, Madurai, u/s 14 of Sarfaesi Act 2002 for taking possession of the following properties in lieu of an outstanding loan of Rs.8,00,85,747/- (Eight Crore Eighty Five thousand Seven hundred and Forty Seven only) due from the debtor Mr.Palanikumar, P.Selvi and Mrs.M.Virumayee Ammal, No.40A, Indira Street, Thanakkankulam, Madurai 625 006.
The following assets are have been mortgaged to State Bank of India, Kappalur belonging to Mr.M.Palanikumar, , S/o.Mayandi Thevar. Item No.1:
All that piece and parcel of the land and buildings Madurai South Registration District, Madurai Sub-division, Thirupparankundram Taluk, Thanakkankulam Village, Old patt No.60 and 241, By Mass No.295, Ayan Punja Survey No.200/3 as per sub division 200/3B5, extent 1 acre 71 cents, the entire extent converted into several house plots. Present schedule item Northern portion of plot No.1 and 1A, Pucca Constructed Building, bearing Door No.3/331, C.S.Road, Thanakkankulam, Madurai within boundaries.
North : Madurai-Thirumangalam main road South : Plot belonging to Ahmed Beig East : 10 feet wide pathway and Thalaichamy Nadar paint Company West : Plot sold by Madasamy Thevar within measuring East West 53-1/2, South North 30' 11'' total extent 1685 sq.ft.s i.e. 3 cents 377 sq.ft. The schedule item falls in Survey No.200/3B5.
Item No.2:
All that piece and parcel of the land and buildings Madurai South Registration District, Madurai Sub-division, Thirupparankundram Taluk, Thankkankulam village, Ayan Punja Survey No.200/3 as per sub-division 200/3B5, extent 1 acre 71 cents, the entire extent converted into several house plots. Present schedule item Southern portion of plot No.1 and 1A, vacant site, within boundaries:
North : House site belonging to Palanikumar South : Plot No.2 and 2A East : 10 ft wide pathway and Thalaichamy Nadar pain company West : Plot sold by Paramasamy Thevar and Venkateswara I.T.I. Within measuring East West 54/1, South Notth 23'1'' total extent extent sq.ft.s.i.e.2 cents 386 sq.ft. The schedule item falls in Survey No.200/3B5. Total extent of Item No.1 and 2 -2943 square feet. (Schedule of immovable property mortgaged to the Bank, belonging to Borrower Mr.M.Palanikumar, S/o.P.Mayandi Thevar) Item No.3:
All that piece and parcel of the land and buildings Madurai South Registration District, Madurai Sub-division, Thirupparankundram Taluk, Thanakkankulam village, Karthiga Nagar, Land measuring 5330 sq.ft (with 2 lots) comprised in R.S.No.163/9, U.D.R.S.No.163/10 and bounded as follows:
North: Land belonging to Amsamani, S.No.163/9A3A1 South: S.No.163/9A3A2 East : Road in S.No.166 West :S.Nos.163/6A, 163/9A2 and 163/15.
Lot 1 measuring 4350 sq.ft i.e. East to West 72 + ft. on the North and South and North to South 60 ft. on the East and the West and Lot 2 measuring 980 Sq.ft. i.e. East to West 55 1.4 ft. on the North and South and North to South 18 ft. on the East and 17 + ft on the West. The property is situated within the limits of Thanakkankulam Panchayat Board. (Schedule of immovable property mortgaged to the Bank, belonging to Borrower Mr.M.Palanikumar, S/o.P.Mayandi Thevar)
3) The Bank has issued notice dated :14.02.2014 u/s.13(2) SARFAESI ACT 2002 to the borrower calling upon him to settle the entire dues with interest within 60 days from the date of receipt of the notice. The debtor and the guarantor have received the notice on 17.02.2014. However, the borrower failed to discharge his liabilities in full within the stipulated period.
4) Since the borrower refused to comply with the notice of the Bank, the Authorised Officer/Chief Manager, State Bank of India, Kappalur Branch, Madurai has filed the present petition and prayed for issue of orders for taking possession of the secured assets.
In this regard, the creditor, State Bank of India was informed over phone to submit Encumbrance certificate in person in respect of the subject property, in response to which he has submitted the said Encumbrance Certificate on 22.09.2014.
5) According to the provision of Sec.14(1) of the SARFAESI ACT, 2002 the Collector and District Magistrate is empowered to take over possession of the secured assets and handover them to the Authorised Officer, State Bank of India, Kappalur Branch, Madurai.
6) In view of the aforesaid facts and as per the provisions of Sec.14(1)(2) of the Act 2002, the Tahsildar, Thirupparankundram is authorized to take possession of the borrower's property situated in their jurisdiction as mentioned above and handover the same to the petitioner bank after getting proper acknowledgement.
7) The Superintendent of Police, Madurai District is requested to provide adequate police protection to the Revenue and Bank officials at the time of taking over possession of the secured assets.
8) It is also mentioned that the Bank officials are fully responsible for the consequences if any in the event of any untoward incident that may occur during the process of taking over possession of above secured assets.?
2. The petitioners have also sought for a direction to quash e-auction notice, dated 03.12.2014 of the Deputy Tahsildar, Thirupparankundram. The main ground of challenge to quash the proceedings dated 10.10.2014, is that the actual physical possession taken by the Deputy Tahsildar, Thriupparankundram, is illegal on the ground that the Tahsildar, Thirupparankundram, alone has been authorised by the District Collector/District Magistrate, Madurai vide proceedings dated 10.10.2014, and he is not empowered under the provisions of the SARFAESI Act, 2002, to delegate the task of taking over possession of the said property by the Deputy Tahsildar, Thirupparankundram. However, Mr.S.Suresh, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, fairly admitted that physical possession of the subject property has also been taken.
3. In so far as the impugned proceedings dated 10.10.2014, we do not find any illegality as the Deputy Tahsildar, Thirupparankundram, can take physical possession on behalf of the Tahsildar, Thirupparankundram. Taking over possession by the Deputy Tahsildar, Thirupparankundram, on behalf of the Tahsildar, Thirupparankundram, would not in any way make the proceedings invalid. For the said reason, we reject the contention of the petitioners in this regard.
4. In so far as challenge to the e-auction notice is concerned, Mr.ARM. Ramesh, learned counsel appearing for the Bank submitted that the borrowers have also challenged the said notice in S.A.No.257 of 2014 and that the same is pending before the Debts Recovery Tribunal, Madurai. Such being the case, it is not open to the petitioners to approach this Court challenging the very same proceedings under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. It is well settled position that parallel proceedings are not permissible.
5. For the above said reasons, we find no merit in the Writ Petition. The Writ Petition is dismissed. No costs. It is open to the petitioners to work out their remedy before the Debts Recovery Tribunal, Madurai. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are also dismissed.
To
1.The District Collector, Madurai District, Madurai.
2.The Tahsildar, Thirupparankundram Taluk, Madurai.
3.The Deputy Tahsildar Thirupparankundram Taluk, Madurai.
4.The Authorised Officer, State Bank of India, Kappalur Branch, Madurai.
.