Smt. Seeta Devi Agarwal vs Dcb Bank Limited on 28 November, 2022

[Cites 4, Cited by 0]

Telangana High Court

Smt. Seeta Devi Agarwal vs Dcb Bank Limited on 28 November, 2022

Bench: P.Naveen Rao

        HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO
                       AND
       HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE J. SREENIVAS RAO

           WRIT PETITION No.23995 of 2022
                    Date:28.11.2022

Between:


Smt Seeta Devi Agarwal
W/o Late Prabhati Lal Agarwal
Aged about 62 yrs Occ House Hold
and others.
                                        .....Petitioners

     And


DCB Bank Limited
Collection Departments 82120/84 2nd Floor Jyothi Majestic
Banjara Hills Hyderabad 500 073 Rep by its Authorized
Officerand others.

                                        .....Respondents




The Court made the following:
                                     -2-




          HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO
                         AND
         HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE J. SREENIVAS RAO

               WRIT PETITION No. 23995 of 2022


ORDER :

(Per Hon'ble Sri Justice P.Naveen Rao) Heard learned counsel Sri Gopala Rao Amancharla.V for petitioners and learned counsel Sri Chetluri Sreenivas for respondents.

2. Petitioners are the legal representatives of late Rameshchand Agarwal who borrowed money from the respondent No.1 - DCB Bank Limited. Holding that the borrower defaulted in repayment of loan, the respondent - Bank has taken recourse to the provisions of the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (for short 'SARFAESI ACT, 2002') to recover the dues. In the process, the respondent - Bank has issued notices under Sections 13(2) and 13(4) of the SARFAESI ACT, 2002. The respondent - Bank also filed C.R.L.MP.No.46 of 2022 under Section 14 of the SARFAESI ACT, 2002, in the Court of the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, at Hyderabad, praying to -3- grant physical possession of the secured asset. On 22.04.2022 learned Magistrate issued warrant appointing an Advocate Commissioner to take the physical possession of the secured asset and return the warrant by 17.06.2022.

3. This Court by order dated 26.05.2022 while issuing notice to respondent Nos. 1 to 3, stayed all further proceedings pursuant to the order dated 22.04.2022 passed by the learned Magistrate.

4. In view of the stay granted by this Court on 26.05.2022, the Advocate Commissioner has not taken the physical possession of the secured asset and could not return the warrant on the date fixed by learned Magistrate.

5. Learned counsel for petitioners sought to contend that if the liability is less than 20% of the amount borrowed with interest, the provisions of the SARFAESI ACT, 2002, are not applicable and without appreciating the said fact, the respondent - Bank illegally proceeded against borrower and after his demise against petitioners. -4-

6. We are not expressing any opinion on the contention urged by learned counsel for petitioner. Since the warrant issued by the learned Magistrate has expired and unless a fresh warrant is issued, nothing survives in the order passed by the learned Magistrate on 22.04.2022 for this Court to consider and pass orders. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of, leaving it open for the petitioners to challenge any actions/measures initiated by respondent - Bank under the provisions of the SARFAESI ACT, 2002, to recover the alleged amounts due.

Miscellaneous petitions, pending if any, shall stand closed.

____________________ P.NAVEEN RAO, J _______________________ J. SREENIVAS RAO, J Date: 28.11.2022 PT -5- HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO AND HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE J. SREENIVAS RAO WRIT PETITION No.23995 of 2022 Date:28.11.2022 PT

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Telangana High Court