Dismissed

Smt. G. Anthonia v. The Collector and District Magistrate

Telangana HC24 Mar 2023WP/45079/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed a writ petition challenging the bank's possession of mortgaged property. Relying on Section 17 of the SARFAESI Act as an effective remedy, the court held that the Writ Court does not interfere when the DRT is available.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition was dismissed, granting liberty to the petitioners to avail the remedy under Section 17 of the SARFAESI Act.

Smt. G. Anthonia Vs The Collector and District… — Banking and Recovery | Telangana HC (2023)

¶1

! I I I

¶2

[³³⁰⁶ ]

¶3

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶4

FRIDAY, THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF^MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P. NAVEEN RAO AND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE J. SREENIVAS RAO

¶7

WRIT PETITION NO: 45079 OF 2022

¶8

Between:

¶9

Smt. G. Anthonia, W/o Late G. Venkat Swamy Aged about 73 years, Occ. Housewife Rlio H. No. 33-50/1 , Officers Colony, Near Guru Nanak School, Ramakrishna Puram Tirumalagiri, Hyderabad 500 056

¶10

E.Shanthi, Wio Late. G. Prakash Kumar Aged about 48 years, Occ.Housewife Rl/o H. No. 33-50/1 , Officers Colony, Near Guru Nanak School, Ramakrishna Puram Tirumalagiri. Hyderabad -500 056

¶11

G.John Reuben, S/o Late. G. Prakash Kumar Aged.17 yrs, Occ.Student (lnter 2nd year) Fl/o H. No. 33-50/1, Officers Colony,. Near Guru Nanak School, Ramakrishna Puram Tirumalagiri. Hyderabad -500 056 Rep.by (P2) Mother

¶12

G.Mary Virginia(daughter), age 14 yrs, Occ.Student (gth class), Rl/o H. No. 33-50/1, Officers Colony, Near Guru Nanak School. Ramakrishna PUEam E

¶13

Tirumalagiri, Hyderabad^: 500 056 Rep.by (P2) Mother

¶14

G.Maheshwar Babu, S/o. Late G. Venkat Swamy Aged about 47 yearc, Occ.Swiggy delivery boy Rl/o H. No. 33-50/'1, Officers Colony, Near Guru Nanak School, Ramakrishna Puram Tirumalagiri, Hyderabad - 500 056.

¶15

G. Santhoshi Kumari, D/o. Late G. Venkata swamy Fi/o H. No. 3350/1,,Officers Colony, age.34, plus-Near Guru Nanak School, Ramakrishna Puram Tirumalagiri' Hyderabad -500 056

¶16

...pETrroNERS

¶17

AND

¶18

The Collector and District Magistrate, Medchal - Malkajgiri District

¶19

The Tahsildar, Malkajgiri Mandal, Medchal - Malkajgiri District,

¶20

State Bank of lndia, Stressed Assets Recovery branch - ll, H. No. 1-8-563/1 , 1'st Floor, Opp.sandhya Theatre, RTC V Road-, Chikkadpally, Hyderabad - 500 020 rep. by its authorised Officer

¶21

The State of Telangana, Rep., by its Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad

¶22

...RESPOT{DENTS

¶23

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a Writ or order or direction more particularly in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the

¶24

A. Action of the Respondent No.3 in illegally dispossessing the Petitioner from their residence i.e., premises bearing No. 33-50/'l on Plot No. 34/4 covered in

¶25

¶26

Survey^{No.1 9511 , 19611 total admeasuring237 .2 Square Yard situated at officers} Colony,^{Ramakrishnapuram,Malakajgiri fVlandal, Hyderabad underthe guise of} executing^{warrantd1.01/1112022 in proceedingsNo.H3/2101/2022withoutthe} presence of^{the ResPondent No.2}

¶27

B. Declaring the^vacate notice dt.09/1^112022issued by the^Respondent No.3 as^{illegal,arbitrary, highhanded, without authority, in violation of rights} guaranteed^{underArticle'14 and 300,4 of the Constitutionof lndia.}

¶28

C. Declaring the^{orders dt.01. 1 1 .2022 passed by the Respondent No. 1 in} proceedings^{No. H3i2'10112022under Section14 of the SARFAESIAct appointing} the^{Respondent No. 2 to takeover the possessionof the schedule property and to} deliver^{the same to the authorized officerof the RespondentNo. 1 and all other} proceedings^{initiated by the Respondent Bank under the provisions of SARFAESI} Act^{as illegal, arbitrary, highhanded and void-ab-initio with a consequential prayer} lo redeliver^{the premises bearingN 33-50/1on PlotNo. 34/4 coveredin Survey} No.^{195i I} ,^{196/1 totaladmeasuring 237.2 SquareYard situated at officers Colony,} Ramakrishnapuram,^{Malakajgiri Mandal in the name of Sri G. Venkata Swamy} vide^{sale deedNo. 10116/1979,dt. 16.08 1979 and boundedby North. Open} Loan,^{South. Plot No. 2413.East. Private House,West .30 feet wide road to the} Petitioner

¶29

IA NO:^10F2022

¶30

Petitio n^{underSection 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in} the affidavit^{filed in supportof the petition,the High Court may be pleased to direct} the^{RespondentNo.3 to redeliver the premises bearingNo. 33-50/1on PlotNo.} 3414^{covercdin Survey No.195/1 , 196/1 total admeasuring237.2 SquareYard} situated^{al officers Colony, Ramakrishnapuram,Malakajgiri Mandal in the name of} Sri G.^{Venkataswamyvide sale deedNo. 10116/1979, dt. 16.08.1979 and} bounded^{by North. Open Loan,South .Plot No.2413, East. Private House, West.} 30 feet^{wide road to the Petitioners}

¶31

IA^{NO120F 2022}

¶32

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit^{filedin support of the petition,} the High Court may be pleased to stay ail further^{proceedings under} Section 13 (4) of the SARFAESI Act in respect of premises bearing No. 33-50/1 on^plot No. 3414 covered in survey No. 1g5/1, 1g6/1

¶33

;{

¶34

¶35

total admeasuring 237.2 Square Yard situated at officers Colony, Ramakrishnapuram,^{Malakajgiri Mandal in the name of Sri G. VenkalaSwamy vide} sale deed No.'10116/1979, dt. 16.08.1979 and bounded by North.Open Loan, South .Plot No. 24i3, East .Private House, West.30 feet wide road^pending disposal of the W.P.

¶36

Counsel forthe Petitioners: SRI V. MURALI MANOHAR

¶37

Counsel for Respondent Nos. 1, 2 & 4: GP FOR REVENUE

¶38

Counsel for Respondent No. 3: SRI M. VENKAT DIVAKAR

¶39

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶40

I^{</sup> /t J .t ./s/1./ tl | \o tjtr9 of 101:'}

)

,II I II I i

-----,

HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO & HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE J.SREENIVAS RAO

¶45

q,RIT PETITION NO.45O79 OF 20.22

¶46

ORDER: (per Hon'ble Sri Justice P.Naueen Rao)

¶47

Husband of the first petitioner and the husband of the second petitioner availed housing loan of { 16,90,000/- from the erstwhile State Bank of Hyderabad, u,l-rich was later amalgamated into State Bank of India, in the ycar 201O. Son of the first petitioner stood as guarantor. The loan amoLurt was repayable in 162 equitable monthly installments @ t 19,800/ pcr month. The I'rouse bearing Municipal No.33-50/1 on Plot no.34 l4 in Sy.Nos. 195/1, 196/1, total admeasuring 237.2 square yards of Officers Colony, Ramakrishnapuram, Malkajgiri Mandal, Secunderabad was mortgaged to secure asset.

¶48

According to the petitioners, on 16.11.2022, some Offrcials of the respondent No.3-Bank visitcd the house and issued vacate notice dated O9.11.2022 and called upon the petitioners to repay the entire loan amount. It is further averred that in the December, 2022, the petitioners visited the Military, Hospital and when they came back to their house, the Officials of 3.d respondent-Bank with the police without any prior intimation had forcibly entered into the house and

¶49

/'\ li^{/.\ /s/"'/} )t t' \n !jtt^{a ,,t :tt::}

¶50

¶51

locked^{the premisesand evictedthe tenantsof the premisesand in} those^{circumstances' present writ petition is fitcd}

¶52

According^{to the learned counsel for petitioners' there was no} prior notice^{before takingPossessronand evicting the tenants' It is} further^{contendedthat Tahsildarwas not present at the timeof} taking^{forcible physicalpossessionand no panchanama wasrecorded} on the^{date of the alleged proceedingsand no warrant was executed'} According^{to the learned counsel' there wasno demandnotice issued} under^{Section13(2) of the Securitization and Reconstructionof} Financial^{Assets and Enforcemento[ Security lnterestAct' 2OO2lfor} short,^{Act, 2OO2\ toenable the petitionersto raise objectionsunder} Section^{13(3)(A)of the Act' 2OO2 lt is further contendedthat as:'} proceedings^{were initiatedagainst the dead person' they would} automatically^{standabatedon the deathof the person and Bank is} required^{to issuefresh notice to the legal-heirs'Itis further} contended^{that aS per the provision in Section1a(3) of thre} ^ct,2oo2, whdn the^{Chief MetropolitanMagistrateor the DistrictMagistrate} orders^{to take physicalpossessionof the securedasset' it cannot be} called in^{questionin any Court or before any authority and' therefore'} petitioners^{have no other remedy except invoking jurisdictionof this} Court

¶53

/, \ /t./ { ./rR / tt P .'o lilt I ol)0):

¶54

¶55

The reirson for knor:kirrg thc doors of this Court under Article 226 of thc Constitution of lndia is the procecding issucd by the Collector on O 1 . 1 I .2022 directing the Tahsildar to takeover physical possession of the schedule property and to deliver the possession to the securcd creditor undcr cover of panchanama and report compliance. This proceeding of the Collector is referable to provision in Section 1a(1) of the Acl, 2002. Under Section 14(1), the secured creditor can secure physical possession of the secured asset by rcquesting the Chicl Mctropolitan Magistrate or the District Magistrate to take possession and handover the possession to him.

¶56

Against any decision ol the secured creditor by invoking the provisions of the Act, 2OO2 after Section 13(3) stage, an aggrieved person can avail the remedy provided by Section 17 of the Act,2OO2. The provision in Section 17 is comprehensive and any grievance arising out of the Act, 2OO2 can be urged before the Debts Recovery Tribunal. The prohibition in Section 14(3)(A) against availing the legal remedy is with reference to Civil Court or an authority. The provision does not bar the^jurisdiction of the Debts Recovery Tribunal in entertaining the application against taking physical possession.

¶57

In Kanaiyalal Lalcyhand Sachdev and others vs, State of Maharashtra and othersr, the Hon'ble Supreme Court held as under:

tl2ol7)2sccl}2

[]

|'.t-R.J.t ./.\R / It l' \o.l;n.it 4 :0::

-')

.21 . In Indian Overseds BoLrrk ,v. Ashok Sau) Mi Il2OOg) g SCC 306l the main question which fe,. ror actermination ;;;'J;;;. have jurisdiction to consider and.olrJ,""" ol"r" s""".Ja" the ,atol ,RT events woutdor the whether srage its contem ptarcd scope in tcrms otscction fZ "fif,..O.i, ,,, O. confined to ^.u"a",^{s."tr", "i.ri;) T lr"o.,, on ,n} examination of the provisions conlaincci in Chapter lll of the Act, in #::::lT.t:::T".li""0^{iz thiscourln"'.,"1''jlo",.,} rscc^pp szi"35. In order to prevent.mlsuse of such widc powers and to prevent crror on rhe prejudice being causcd to a borrower .. ";;;;;;i# fl:,T":j"^{ti".,:^}:,., o! fi.1n"iut^{i.,"u,r,.,,",-...,.i1checks} and pe.rson, incrudins ;;",;ji:::r1[,i;""jT, :lr,:i. fl:]J:i reterred to in sub.section (41 of Se_ctio. r.,-,i,1"..]. ffi Lf^.;li ilT; :1,:,1l,: :il,:^{;:' ;il.' ; Jii*"i,.:L} r; ;"# i;: ro'.r,"."ii"6'i"ii.-"1'"1l,.,"iil:.:i:""iliu"h-"""u'""havinsraken

¶66

36 The intention of the

¶67

banks and n,.,",.,.,", ,nJi*,,1",',1t"Tt^i";-,il::lP,1 lrear rhar rvhire rhe [?i:::,1il[:',T"'..:l'5::..^:::,.::;:; "il:i^J;::T. ;X,1" ;l;liJ# to nnr declare i,i "i,"#i,iJ'jf,"f -l.o1ctrl^{use or such powers} ica tion. in bv to vcsrrns tr,. -Iu".rhc ".,y "r"h "",,il"l,i,tji,1t^{ij'^adjud} even thoush possession -"v i,"," i".".i,J:".j:. ::"il:",.::""?::;"::"

¶68

)ooo<

¶69

We are unable to aor a.n"tt i ,G if,),iini!'r1'-.t' , 'o^{o!^1-"p'thc submisstons} mdcte on u.,ith tti ""i[i - iirJ ,i?,, ,ff y.!:! no lurisdrction to nterlere ffi"y::f*iy":"rii.:::!1-?i.;;;.;",";x,,i;"2!,f L,l!^o",,?fli Ii}:T"T,;';if 1;.,:fr::i,:"":,'.iil.iXii"'8"X"T""*n,y"I restored by"the Dii.' suru< ot'r[ even the sutus quo ante can be (emphasis supplied by us;

¶70

in? X"Tf ,T ,T"iffillT;,'r::t:ll^{the above} enunciation or raw on i{i::ii:":r":",'#i"f_lipU:":f l}":.i#ii?{l,.dT r'#"J,r,-ti"#'""ft"jn j,Lr..T[p,!:,'"::,rfi^gti,,Ti

¶71

7. In Bajrang Shyaasunder Agarwal Vs. Central Bank of Indla

¶72

aad others2, the Honble Supreme Court held as under:

¶73

'I5. Section l7 provides for ar incruding,r," ri".-",'; "lr';:;tii:"Bf[J ppeal to any person Recovery Tribunal

¶74

2lzorslssccs+

¶75

/,\ R.^/ ,1 ./,( / ll I' \o 15ll), al)0::

¶76

¶77

(hcreinafter r-elerrc(l lo as "l)R'1^{") ln lTi;.rshcdGouardhancctseUtarshad} Gouor(lhan Sontlotlor^{vIttrernattotlc],4sset'sReco[slructiottCoLtd-'} (20 I4) 6 SCLI I :^{(i011) 3 SCt'(Civ)llthis courtheld that the righto[} opp.-l i" availablc^{to th(:lt:llantclaimingunder a borrorver' however'} the right o[ rc^{possession do(snot exist withthe tenant Horvever'in} i"""ig"l"l I'atchc,nd Saclrcleu^{v.Saote ofMalnrashtra} -lKanaiyalal it"nina Sachdeu v. State^{of MalLarashtra,(2Qlll 2SCC7a2:(2011) I} SCc tCir) 57ol ,^{this Court held thatDRTcan, not only set aside the} action of tne^{secu|cdcreditor'bllteven restore tlle status quo anteWe} do not intend to^{exprcss anv view on this issue since it is notrelevant} io. tn. ai"pn".l oi^{ttrisappeal We alsonote that Parliament has} siepped in and^{amended Section 17 by the Enforcement of Security} i.,tli."t "rtO^{Recoveryof Debts Lawsand MiscellaneousProvisions} ie-..J-""if^{act, zott ga of 2016lUnder the amendment' possession} ian be restored^{to the 'borror'r'eror such otheraggrieved person"'}

¶78

Wc are^o1' the^{opinion that the remedy availableunderSection} 17 of thc Act,^{2OO2 is an cffccLivcand efficacious remedyand when} an aggrieved^{person has an elfective and efficaciousremedy'the writ} Court does^{not entertain the Writ Petition and relegatethe partiesto} averil the szrid^rt'medY

¶79

g. The Writ Petition^{is accordingly dismissed granting liberty to} the petitioners^{to avail the remedyunder Section17 of the LcL' 2OO2'} Pending miscellaneous^{applications if any shall stand closed'}

¶80

//TRUE COPY//

¶81

SD/.C.PRAVEEN KUMAR ASSISTANT REGISTRARq

SECTION OFFICER

To,