affirmed by the Authorised Officer of the secured creditor. Nnone of the clauses to the proviso Section 14(1) of the SARFAESI Act neither mandates nor does contemplate the production of copy of account statement alongwith the application and affidavit. The Chief Judicial Magistrate Court is not expected to make a roving enquiry into the correctness of the financial assistance granted and the outstanding amount in the affidavit. Even in the aforecited judgment, the Hon’ble Supreme Court has held that the satisfaction of the Magistrate contemplated under 2nd proviso to Section 14(1) of the Act necessarily requires the Magistrate to examine the factual assertions made in such an affidavit but not the legal niceties of the transaction and that it is only after recording of his satisfaction, the Magistrate can pass appropriate orders regarding taking of possession of the secured asset. In the present case on hand, a perusal of Annexure – A4 order shows that the Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Ernakulam, after having perusal of the contents of the affidavit and the documents filed in support of the affidavit appointed Advocate Commissioner to take physical possession of the secured asset. Hence, this Tribunal does not find any force in the above submission of the counsel for the applicants.
