9911796707
|
Home
Issues Involved:
1. Whether the respondents banks can take possession of the secured assets after issuing sale certificates in respect of auction purchasers. 2. Whether the respondents banks can maintain an application under Section 14(1)(2) of the SARFAESI Act before the concerned Judicial Magistrate, seeking police assistance to take possession of the secured assets. Issue-wise Detailed Analysis: 1. Whether the respondents banks can take possession of the secured assets after issuing sale certificates in respect of auction purchasers: The core issue revolves around whether the banks, having issued sale certificates to auction purchasers, can still take possession of the secured assets. The petitioners argued that once a sale certificate is issued, the bank loses its status as a "secured creditor" and the property ceases to be a "secured asset." They contended that the banks should have taken actual physical possession at the time of issuing notice under Section 13(4) of the SARFAESI Act and that symbolic possession is insufficient. The court, however, found that the language of Section 13(4) of the SARFAESI Act does not mandate actual physical possession before issuing a sale certificate. The Act allows secured creditors to take possession of the secured assets and transfer them, including by sale, without specifying that physical possession is a prerequisite. The court emphasized that the object of the SARFAESI Act is to enable speedy recovery of debts and ensure that third-party purchasers can acquire clear title to the property without undue delay. 2. Whether the respondents banks can maintain an application under Section 14(1)(2) of the SARFAESI Act before the concerned Judicial Magistrate, seeking police assistance to take possession of the secured assets: The petitioners argued that the banks, having taken only symbolic possession and issued sale certificates, cannot seek police assistance under Section 14(1)(2) to take physical possession. They based their argument on the language of Section 14(1), which refers to "secured creditors" and "secured assets," suggesting that these terms no longer apply once a sale certificate is issued. The court rejected this argument, stating that Section 14 should not be read in isolation but in conjunction with other provisions of the SARFAESI Act, such as Sections 13(4), 13(6), and 13(8). The court found that the Act's purpose is to facilitate the recovery of debts and that the banks retain their status as secured creditors even after issuing sale certificates. The court held that the banks are entitled to seek police assistance under Section 14(1)(2) to take physical possession of the secured assets, ensuring that the auction purchasers can obtain clear title and possession without unnecessary delays. Conclusion: The court concluded that the respondents banks are legally entitled to take physical possession of the secured assets after issuing sale certificates to auction purchasers. The banks can maintain an application under Section 14(1)(2) of the SARFAESI Act before the concerned Judicial Magistrate, seeking police assistance to take possession of the secured assets. The writ petitions were dismissed, and the court emphasized that the interpretation of the SARFAESI Act should align with its objective of enabling speedy recovery of debts and ensuring clear title transfer to third-party purchasers.
|
