The Debts Recovery Tribunal dismissed a Securitization Application challenging a Section 14 possession order issued by the Chief Judicial Magistrate. The tribunal held that Section 14 powers are ministerial and non-adjudicatory, making the order incon Testable under Section 17.
SA No. 646/2024 dismissed; any interim order vacated; pending IAs disposed of.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
SA No.646/2024
09.04.2026
1
IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHENNAI
Dated this the 09th day of April, 2026
Present: SMT. S.V. GOWRAMMA Presiding Officer
SA No. 646 of 2024
W/o. Anandhraj, No.AA5, New S1 Quarters, Near K4 Police Quarters, Anna Nagar, Chennai, Tamil Nadu – 600 040.
…Applicants
-Vs-
M/s. Bajaj Housing Finance Ltd, Unit No.209, 210, 2nd Floor Alpha Wing, Beta Wiong, Raheja Towers, 177, Anna Salai, Chennai 600 002. Rep. by its Authorized Officer, Mr. Rathish Ramachandran.
…Respondent
Counsels on record / appeared:
Counsel for Applicant : Mr. P. Karunakaran Counsel for Respondent : Mr. M. Arunachalam
Uploaded in E-Drt on 09.04.2026 at 02:40 p.m.
SA No.646/2024
2
09.04.2026
ORDER ON SA 646 /2024
The present Securitization Application [SA] is filed under sub section [1] of S.17 of the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Asset and Enforcement of Security Interest Act,2002 (for short the ‘Act’) challenging the action and the measure taken by the secured creditor under the Security Interest Enforcement Rules, 2002 [for short the Rules].
Uploaded in E-Drt on 09.04.2026 at 02:40 p.m.
SA No.646/2024
3
09.04.2026
or before 07.08.2024 and the balance payment of Rs.56,60,000/- on or before 30.08.2024 but the applicants have paid only Rs.25,00,000/towards the OTS agreement dated 07.08.2024.
Uploaded in E-Drt on 09.04.2026 at 02:40 p.m.
SA No.646/2024
09.04.2026
4
the paper publications and photograph of affixture are produced at Page No.77 to 80 of respondent’s counter.
Uploaded in E-Drt on 09.04.2026 at 02:40 p.m.
SA No.646/2024
09.04.2026
5
Mahindra Bank vs Girnar Corrugators Pvt. Ltd. & Others , held that while exercising power under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act, even the District Magistrate has no jurisdiction and/or District Magistrate and/or even the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate has no jurisdiction to adjudicate the dispute between secured creditor and debtor.”
Ltd. Vs. The State of Maharashtra has held that Court is only required to verify the affidavit of Secured Creditor filed in pursuance of the proviso to Section 14 and nothing more. The above Bombay High Court judgment has since been confirmed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court by its judgment dated
26.09.2022 in the matter of Balakrishna Ram Tarle v. Phoenix ARC (P)
Ltd. as under:
“Thus, the powers exercisable by CMM/DM Under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act are ministerial step and Section 14 does not involve any adjudicatory process qua points raised by the borrowers against the secured creditor taking possession of the secured assets. In that view of the matter once all the requirements Under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act are complied with/satisfied by the secured creditor, it is the duty cast upon the CMM/DM to assist the secured creditor in obtaining the possession as well as the documents related to the secured assets even with the help of any officer subordinate to him and/or with the help of an advocate appointed as Advocate Commissioner. At that stage, the CMM/DM is not required to adjudicate the dispute between the borrower and the secured creditor and/or between any other third party and the secured creditor with respect to the secured assets and the aggrieved party to be relegated to raise objections in the proceedings Under Section 17 of the SARFAESI Act, before Debts Recovery Tribunal”.
Uploaded in E-Drt on 09.04.2026 at 02:40 p.m.
SA No.646/2024
6
09.04.2026
14. T hus, the Section 14 order passed by the Ld. Section 14 order dated 09.08.2024 in Crl.M.P. No.3679/2024 passed by CJM, Tiruvallur is after due consideration of the application, affidavit in support of compliance of procedures along with documents is an execution Order issued where no adjudication is required. The Order is passed considering the due compliance of the provisions of the S. 14 [i-ix].
Uploaded in E-Drt on 09.04.2026 at 02:40 p.m.
SA No.646/2024
09.04.2026
7
vacated, pending IAs are disposed of in terms of this final order. No order as to cost.
Sd/- (S.V. GOWRAMMA) PRESIDING OFFICER, DRT-III, CHENNAI
(Dictated to Steno (Mogesh), transcribed by him, corrected, signed and pronounced by me on this the 09th day of April, 2026)
ANNEXURES
LIST OF DOCUMENTS PRODUCED BY THE APPLICANT
| Sl. No. |
Description of Documents | Document No. |
|---|---|---|
| 1. | Loan repayment schedule | A-1 |
| 2. | Intimation letter issued by the respondent bank dated 12.06.2023 |
A-2 |
| 3. | Settlement notice by the respondent institution agreeing for One Time Settlement dated 07.08.2024 |
A-3 |
| 4. | Payment receipt issued by respondent bank for Rs.5,00,000 vide receipt No.24153682 dated 07.08.2024 |
A-4 |
| 5. | Order passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Tiruvallur in Crl.M.P.No.3679 of 2024 dated 09.08.2024 |
A-5 |
| 6. | Customer Acknowledgment for payment of Rs.10,00,000 vide Transaction Reference No.ICICR52024083000383106 dated 30.08.2024 |
A-6 |
| 7. | Caveat memo dated 11.09.2024. | A-7 |
| 8. | Vakalatnama dated 11.09.2024. | A-8 |
Uploaded in E-Drt on 09.04.2026 at 02:40 p.m.
SA No.646/2024
8
09.04.2026
LIST OF DOCUMENTS PRODUCED BY THE RESPONDENTS
| Sl. No. |
Description of Documents | Document No. |
|---|---|---|
| 1. | Copy of Power of Attorney dated 05.03.2024 | R-1 |
| 2. | Copy of Loan agreement for a sum of Rs.65,49,522/- (Rs.63,75,000/- Vide LAN 403DHH67792010 and Rs.1,74,533/- vide LAN 403DLT67801814 dated 31.01.2018 |
R-2 |
| 3. | Copy of MODT dated 26.03.2018 | R-3 |
| 4. | Copy of Demand Notice under Section 13(2) of the SARFAESI Act calling upon the applicants to pay a sum of Rs.80,05,329/- along with postal receipts and online track dated 02.09.2023. |
R-4 |
| 5. | Copy of paper publication of the demand notice under Section 13(2) in English Newspaper “The New Indian Express” and Tamil Newspaper “Dhinamani”dated 13.09.2023 |
R-5 |
| 6. | Copy of Possession Notice under Section 13(4) of the SARFAESI Act along with postal receipts and online track dated 16.11.2023. |
R-6 |
| 7. | Copy of pasting photos of Section 13(4) Notice dated 16.11.2023 |
R-7 |
| 8. | Copy of Publication of the possession notice under Section 13(4) in English Newspaper “The New Indian Express” and Tamil Newspaper “Dinamani”dated 18.11.2023 |
R-8 |
| 9. | Copy of Sale notice along with postal receipts and online track dated 01.10.2024 |
R-9 |
| 10. | Copy of paper publication of the sale notice under Section 13(2) in English Newspaper “The New Indian Express” and Tamil Newspaper “Dinamani”both dated on 04.10.2024 |
R-10 |
| 11. | Copy of Statement of accounts vide LAN 403DHH67792010 DATED 05.03.2025. |
R-11 |
SCHEDULE OF PROPERTY
All that part and parcel of property situated at Flat No.1104 in the 1st Floor, Block B in the building known as “Guru Brindavan Garden” together with an undivided 388 sq.ft., share in the land measuring 1 Acre 75 cents, comprised in S.Nos.101/2A1 (1 Acre) and S.No.106/1 (75 cents), (less
Uploaded in E-Drt on 09.04.2026 at 02:40 p.m.
SA No.646/2024
9
09.04.2026
Road gifted for Road widening and OSR) i.e., land measuring 146 cents, Adayalampattu Village, situate at Vanagaram, Ambattur Road, Adayalampattu, Ambattur Taluk, Thiruvallur District and the land bounded on the :
North by : S.No.101/2A2 South by : Village Road and S.No.106/2 East by : S.No.105/2 & 106/2 West by : Vanagaram, Ambattur Road
Situated within the Sub-Registration District of Central South Joint - II and in the registration district of Chennai – South.
Sd/-
(S.V. GOWRAMMA) PRESIDING OFFICER, DRT-III, CHENNAI
Uploaded in E-Drt on 09.04.2026 at 02:40 p.m.
2 issues framed by the court
Whether a Securitization Application challenging a Section 14 order under the SARFAESI Act should be allowed when the power under Section 14 is ministerial and non-adjudicatory.
Whether the requirement of Section 14(3) precludes any court challenge to the action taken by the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate under Section 14.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Kotak Mahindra Bank v Girnar Corrugators Pvt Ltd & OthersApplied¶46
Kotak Mahindra Bank vs Girnar Corrugators Pvt. Ltd. & Others
Phoenix ARC Pvt Ltd v The State of MaharashtraReferred¶48
Phoenix ARC Pvt. Ltd. Vs. The State of Maharashtra
Balakrishna Ram Tarle v Phoenix ARC (P) LtdApplied¶50
Balakrishna Ram Tarle v. Phoenix ARC (P) Ltd.
3 provisions across 1 enactments
A. Immanuel Raj
A. Santhi
M/s. Bajaj Housing Finance Ltd
S.V. Gowramma
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
