Amit Rathi And 3 Others vs State Of U P And 5 Others
2019 Latest Caselaw 6584 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?Court No. - 29
 

 
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 23547 of 2019
 

 
Petitioner :- Amit Rathi And 3 Others
 
Respondent :- State Of U P And 5 Others
 
Counsel for Petitioner :- Veerendra Kumar Shukla,Diwakar Tiwari
 
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Krishna Mohan Asthana
 

 
Hon'ble Pankaj Mithal,J.

Hon'ble Saral Srivastava,J.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners. Sri K.M. Asthana, Advocate has accepted notice on behalf of respondent no. 5.

The petitioners are the heirs and legal representatives of the borrower. On account of default in the payment of the secured loan, proceedings under Section 13 of the SARFAESI Act (hereinafter referred to as 'Act) were initiated against the borrower and finally, an order was passed under Section 14 of the Act on 27.09.2016 for taking physical possession of the secured assets. In pursuance of the above order, the possession of the property has been taken over in July, 2019.

The petitioners have challenged the proceedings under Sections 13 and 14 of the Act on the ground that as the borrower had died, respondents are liable to initiate fresh proceedings against the petitioners before proceeding to realize the dues from the secured assets.

Admittedly, the proceedings under Section 13 and 14 of the Act were completed on 27.09.2016 except for taking physical possession in pursuance of the order under Section 14 of the Act.

The borrower had died much after the above order in the year 2018. It is not in dispute that he was not aware of all the proceedings and that all orders under Sections 13 and 14 of the Act were passed after notice to him.

In this view of the matter, petitioners who have stepped into the shoes of the borrower are not entitled for any de-novo proceedings and they are bound by the orders which have been passed against the borrower during his life time.

The submission of learned counsel for the petitioners is that they are ready and willing to make payment but auction of the property may not be held. There is no dispute that so far the secured assets have not been auctioned and transferred, therefore, in view of Section 13 (8) of the Act, petitioners are entitled to redeem the secured assets by depositing the entire outstanding amount. Accordingly, petitioners can approach the authorities for the redemption of the secured assets.

In view of aforesaid facts and circumstances, we dispose off the writ petition with the liberty to the petitioners to apply for the redemption of the secured assets before the auction/sale of the property.

Order Date :- 1.8.2019

Sattyarth