Allowed

Rbl Bank Limited v. M/S Kiran Sales Private Limited

Rajasthan HC4 Mar 2024CW/2290/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of the Writ Petition filed by RBL Bank Limited, directing the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Udaipur to pass necessary orders under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act within 30 days, following a coordinate bench judgment in a similar matter.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Udaipur to pass necessary orders on the application under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act within 30 days.

Rbl Bank Limited Vs M/S Kiran Sales Private Limited — Execution and Attachment | Rajasthan HC (2024)

¶1

[2024:RJ-JD:10701]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶3

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 2290/2024

¶4

RBL Bank Limited, Having Its Registered Office At First Lane, Shahupuri, Kolhapur- 416001 And Regional Operating Center First Floor, Building No.1, Aukhla Industrial Estate, Phase- 3, New Delhi- 110020 And Regional Office At Shop No.1, Ground Floor, Silver Square Bhagwan Das Road, Jaipur Through Its Authorized Signatory Yogesh Kumar Pareek S/o Mahendra Kumar Pareek.

¶5

----Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

M/s Kiran Sales Private Limited, Jogiwada 88, Behind Woodland Showroom, Bapu Bajar, Udaipur - 313001, Rajasthan Through Its Director/ Authorized Signatory.

¶8

Vivek Lasod, Director M/s Kiran Sales Pvt. Ltd, R/o Jogiwada 88, Behind Woodland Showroom, Bapu Bazar, Udaipur- 313001, Raj. Also At 21, Technocrat Society, Bedla Road, Girwa, Udaipur Rajasthan - 313001

¶9

Kamla Lasod, 21, Technocrat Society, Bedla Road, Girwa, Udaipur Rajasthan - 313001.

¶10

Legal Heirs Of Kiran Chand Lasod, Jagiwada 88, Behind Woodland Showroom, Bapu Bazar, Udaipur - 313001, Rajasthan. Also At 21, Technocrat Society, Bedla Road, Girwa, Udaipur Rajasthan - 313001.

¶11

----Respondents

¶12

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Arpit Mehta

¶13

HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE NUPUR BHATI

¶14

Order

¶15

04/03/2024

¶16

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that issue involved in this writ petition has been considered by a Coordinate Bench in the matter of ICICI Bank Ltd. Vs. M/s. National Steel

(2 of 3)

[2024:RJ-JD:10701]

[CW-2290/2024]

Corporation & Ors : S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.4529/2019 ,

¶21

wherein following order was passed on 26.03.2019:-

¶22

“1. Petitioner has preferred this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India claiming the following reliefs :-

¶23

“a) by an appropriate writ, order or direction, this petition for writ in the nature of mandamus filed by the petitioner Bank may kindly be allowed.

¶24

b) by an appropriate writ, order or direction, the respondent No.5 District Collector – cum – District Magistrate, Bikaner may kindly be directed to adhere to the provisions of Section 14 provided by the Amendment Act 2016 and pass an appropriate order under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act, 2002 in relation to the misc. case (Section 14 of SARFAESI Act)No.139/2018 titled as “ICICI Bank Limited Vs.M/s. National Stell Corporation & Ors.” with immediate effect.”

¶25

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner makes a limited submission that the petitioner-Bank moved an application under Section 14 of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act (SARFAESI), 2002 before the respondent No.5 District Collector, Bikaner on 23.10.2018, and while giving out the details of immovable property mortgaged by the respondentsborrowers with the petitioner-Bank, the petitionerBank requested that possession of the said mortgaged property may be taken from the respondents borrowers and be handed over to the petitioner-Bank or its’ duly authorized representative.

¶26

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in accordance with the mandate of Section 14 of SARFAESI Act, 2002, the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate or District Magistrate is required to assist secured creditor in taking the possession of the secured asset. However, as a specific mandate incorporated in Section 14 of the Act of 2002 by way of amendment, which came into force w.e.f. 01.09.2016, the authority is required to pass necessary orders within a period

(3 of 3)

[2024:RJ-JD:10701]

[CW-2290/2024]

of 30 days, and if some reasonable cause of delay arises, then at most within 60 days.

¶31

4. Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act, 2002, as amended, and came into effect on 1st September,2016 reads as follows :-

¶32

“12. In the principal Act, in section 14, in sub-section (1), —

¶33

(i) in the second proviso, after the words"secured assets", the words "within a period of thirty days from the date of application"shall be inserted;

¶34

(ii) after the second proviso, the following proviso shall be inserted, namely:—"Provided further that if no order is passed by the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate or District Magistrate within the said period of thirty days for reasons beyond his control, he may, after recording reasons in writing for the same, pass the order within such further period but not exceeding in aggregate sixty days."

¶35

5. In light of the aforesaid submission, the present writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondent No.5 to pass the necessary orders on the application of the petitioner under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act, 2002 within a period of 30 days from today strictly in accordance with law. Stay petition No.4409/2019 also stands disposed of accordingly.”

¶36

In that view of the matter, the present writ petition is disposed of with a direction to learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Udaipur to pass necessary orders on the application of the petitioner under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act, 2002, strictly in accordance with law, within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.

¶37

Stay petition also stands disposed of.

¶38

(DR. NUPUR BHATI),J

¶39

66-amit/-

Rbl Bank Limited v. M/S Kiran Sales Private Limited

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rbl Bank Limited v. M/S Kiran Sales Private Limited

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rupali Marbles Private Limited Vs State of Rajasthan

Hadman Ram Vs Dharmaram

Gyanada Paramedical College Vs State of Rajasthan

Smt. Pushpa Devi Vs Manager

M/S. Ritu Goods Carrier Vs State of Rajasthan

Chirayu Hospital College of Nursing Vs State of Rajasthan