Petitioner challenging Section 13(8) SARFAESI Act having no personal interest, as he is a busybody concerned with a neighbour's issues, Court dismisses petition without merits and warns against frivolous litigation.
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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 17.04.2021
CORAM :
The Hon'ble Mr.SANJIB BANERJEE, THE CHIEF JUSTICE
AND
The Hon'ble Mr.JUSTICE SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY
W.P.No.9478 of 2021
G.Srinivasan
... Petitioner
-vs-
1 Union of India Ministry of Finance, Rep by Secretary (Ministry of Finance), North Block,
New Delhi-110 001
2 Chairman, IOB, Central office, 763, Anna Salai, Chennai 600 002
3 General Manager GM(Law Dept), IOB Central Office, 763, Anna Salai Chennai-600 002
4 A.Selva Rangam
5 Dr.S.Suganya
6 S.Aravindan
... Respondents
PRAYER:- Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issue of Writ of Mandamus to direct the Respondent 2 and Respondents 3 to expedite and take over the physical possession of the 200 properties (Unsold -re possessed flats Worth) about Rs.100 crores appearing in the website of IOB for auction sale including that of the Flat Mortgaged by Respondents-5 being 101, Surendra Homes No.1, Pammal Main Road, Pallavaram, Chennai-600 043 within fifteen days under S.13 (8) r.w.s 14 of SARFAESI Act so that these vacant Flats are handed over to the respective prospective buyers along with the issuance of Sale certificate; impose exemplary costs and penalty U/s.29 of SARFAESI Act on the Respondent-2 3 and other officials of the IOB Bank for failing to implement the amended S.13(8) read with S.14 of SARFAESI Act which has been amended to earn better revenue and other reliefs.
For Petitioner : Mr.G.Srinivasan, Party-in-person For Respondents : Mr.B.Sudhir Kumar, S.P.C., for 1st respondent
ORDER
(Made by The Hon'ble Chief Justice)
The petitioner is, apart from being a lawyer, a busybody qua the matters complained of. The petitioner seeks to challenge the validity of Section 13 (8) of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002, but the petitioner does not indicate how the petitioner is adversely affected by any action under such provision.
Sra
-s/d-
Deputy Registrar
True Copy
Sub-Assistant Registrar
To
| 1 |
The Secretary, (Ministry of Finance), North Block, New Delhi-110 001. |
|---|---|
| 2 |
The Chairman, IOB, Central Office 763, Anna Salai, Chennai 600 002. |
| 3 |
The General Manager GM (Law Dept) , IOB, Central Office, 763, Anna Salai, Chennai-600 002. |
| + 1 | cc to M/s. B. Sudhir Kumar, Advocate Sr.23479 |
| JP- EU |
W.P.No.9478 of 2021 II(CO) 7.6.2021 |
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner has locus standi to challenge Section 13(8) of the SARFAESI Act.
Whether a neighbour facing credit difficulties can challenge the seizure of properties for auction otherwise unrelated.
Whether the writ petition filed under Article 226 should be allowed or dismissed in absence of personal interest.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
G.Srinivasan
Union of India
Chairman, IOB
General Manager GM(Law Dept), IOB
A.Selva Rangam
Dr.S.Suganya
Sanjib Banerjee
Senthil Kumar Ramamoorthy
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
