High Court Madras High Court

S.Senthilathipan vs The Authorised Officer on 26 November, 2010

Madras High Court
S.Senthilathipan vs The Authorised Officer on 26 November, 2010
       

  

  

 
 
 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

DATED: 26/11/2010

CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.JYOTHIMANI

Writ Petition(MD)No.10227 of 2009
and
M.P.(MD)No.1 of 2009

S.Senthilathipan				... Petitioner

Vs.

The Authorised Officer,
ARMB,
Indian Bank, Circle Office,
100-101, East Avanimoola Street,
Madurai - 625 001	 			...   Respondent

PRAYER

Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the
issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, forbearing the respondent from physically
dispossessing the petitioner from the properties mortgaged in favour of the
respondent bank and auction notice intended sale dated 10.09.2009 by the
respondent except in accordance with law.

!For Petitioner 	 ... Mr.G.R.Swaminathan
^For Respondent		 ... Mr.Pala.Ramasamy

:ORDER

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for
the respondent.

2.Admittedly, the proceedings under Section 13 of the Securitisation and
Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act,
2002, (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) has been initiated against the
petitioner and has already moved the Debts Recovery Tribunal and as submitted by
the learned counsel for the petitioner, the tribunal after hearing the parties
has also reserved orders. In the meantime, the petitioner anticipated that the
respondent is likely to take physical possession of the property without waiting
for the order of the Tribunal. Such prayer cannot be actually granted at this
stage. When once the tribunal under the Act is seized of the matter, it is not
for this Court to give any direction. Needless to state that when the matter is
pending before the Debts Recovery Tribunal, the respondent cannot certainly take
such forceful possession except by following the procedure which is contemplated
under Section 14 of the Act, which is as follows:

14. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate or District Magistrate to assist secured
creditor in taking possession of secured asset.-(1) Where the possession of any
secured asset is required to be taken by the secured creditor or if any of the
secured asset is required to be sold or transferred by the secured creditor
under the provisions of this Act, the secured creditor may, for the purpose of
taking possession or control of any such secured asset, request, in writing, the
Chief Metropolitan Magistrate or the District Magistrate within whose
jurisdiction any such secured asset or other documents relating thereto may be
situated or found, to take possession thereof, and the Chief Metropolitan
Magistrate or, as the case may be, the District Magistrate shall, on such
request being made to him-

(a) take possession of such asset and documents relating thereto;
and

(b) forward such asset and documents to the secured creditor.
(2) For the purpose of securing compliance with the provisions of sub-
section (1), the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate or the District Magistrate may
take or cause to be taken such steps and use, or cause to be used, such force,
as may, in his opinion, be necessary.

(3) No act of the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate or the District Magistrate
done in pursuance of this section shall be called in question in any Court or
before any authority

3.In such view of the matter, except making the above said observation,
there is no further relief granted. The writ petition stands closed accordingly.
No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

sms

To

The Authorised Officer,
ARMB,
Indian Bank, Circle Office,
100-101, East Avanimoola Street,
Madurai – 625 001