Disposed

M/S.Repco Home Finance Limited v. Distric Magistrate and District Collector

Madras HC20 Feb 2024WP/3847/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A writ petition sought execution of a Section 14 SARFAESI Act order for physical possession of secured assets, unexecuted reportedly due to an earlier stay later vacated. The court directed the petitioner to submit supporting documents to the authority and asked it to verify and execute the order if no stay operates.

What the court decided

AI extract

M/S.Repco Home Finance Limited Vs Distric Magistrate and… — Banking and Recovery | Madras HC (2024)

¶1

W.P.No.3847 of 2024

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 20.02.2024

¶4

CORAM :

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR.SANJAY V.GANGAPURWALA, CHIEF JUSTICE AND

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY

¶7

W.P.No.3847 of 2024

¶8

M/s. REPCO Home Finance Limited Rep. by its Authorised Officer/ Assistant General Manager (Recovery) K.Baggiyaraj Plot No.4055, U Block No.10, 1^st Floor, 4^th Main Road Anna Nagar, Chennai 600 040. .. Petitioner

¶9

Vs.

¶10

District Magistrate and District Collector Chennai Having office at 4^th Floor, Singaravelar Maaligai No.62, Rajaji Salai, Chennai 600 001.

¶11

The Tahsildar Maduravoyal Taluk Having office at No.35HF + 550, Bharathi Salai Mogappair West, Ambattur Industrial Estate Chennai 600 037.

¶12

The Deputy Commissioner of Police Ramapuram

¶13

_________ Page 1 of 5_

¶14

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶15

W.P.No.3847 of 2024

¶16

Chennai.

¶17

.. Respondents

¶18

Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to execute the order passed by the 1^st respondent in Rc.115/24826/2018 dated 09.03.2020 under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act and to take physical possession of the secured assets mentioned therein and hand over the same to the petitioner within a stipulated period.

¶19

For the Petitioner : Mr.A.Ilangovan

¶20

For the Respondents : Mr.T.K.Saravanan Government Advocate for Respondents 1 and 2

¶21

Mr.R.Muniyapparaj Additional Public Prosecutor Assisted by Mr.M.Sylvester John for Respondent-3

¶22

ORDER

¶23

(Made by the Hon'ble Chief Justice)

¶24

We have heard Mr.A.Ilangovan, learned counsel for the

¶25

petitioner,, Mr.T.K.Saravanan, learned Government Advocate for the respondents 1 and 2 and Mr.R.Muniyapparaj, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, assisted by Mr.M.Sylvester John, learned counsel for the

¶26

_________ Page 2 of 5_

¶27

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶28

W.P.No.3847 of 2024

¶29

third respondent.

¶30

It is submitted that the order under Section 14 of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 is passed on 09.03.2020. The same is not yet executed.

¶31

Learned Government Advocate submitted that as the stay was operating, the order could not be executed.

¶32

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the borrower did not comply with the condition imposed by the Debts Recovery Tribunal in his Securitisation Application and the stay has been vacated.

¶33

The petitioner shall bring this fact to the notice of the concerned authority with the relevant documents. The concerned authority shall verify the same and if there is no stay operating, then effective steps shall be taken for executing the order passed under

¶34

Page 3 of 5

¶35

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶36

W.P.No.3847 of 2024

¶37

Section 14 of the Act immediately.

¶38