Asrec (India) Limited vs The State Of Maharashtra Through ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 7742 Bom

                                                                                              3 WP 7022-21.doc



                                          IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                                       CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
           Digitally signed
           by LAXMI
LAXMI      SUBHASH
SUBHASH    SONTAKKE
SONTAKKE   Date:
           2023.08.04
           16:49:42 +0530                              WRIT PETITION NO. 7022 OF 2021


                              ASREC (India) Ltd.                                        .. Petitioner

                                       Versus

                              The State of Maharashtra & Ors.                           .. Respondents


                                   Mr. Charles D'souza a/w Trupti Shetty for the Petitioner.

                                   Ms S. D. Vyas, 'B' Panel Advocate for the State.

                                   Mr. Aditya Khare for Respondent Nos. 5 and 6.

                                                                 CORAM        : B. P. COLABAWALLA &
                                                                               M.M. SATHAYE, JJ.

                                                                 DATE         : AUGUST 03, 2023

                              P. C.

1. The issue in this Writ Petition is whether the Bank has a

priority over the sale proceeds received by the Petitioner (Asset

Reconstruction Company) from the sale of the secured asset or whether

the Sale Tax Authorities have a priority over the Petitioner (Asset

Reconstruction Company).

AUGUST 03, 2023 Laxmi

3 WP 7022-21.doc

2. We have heard this Writ Petition for quite a while. In the

affidavit in reply filed by the State, a specific case is pleaded that the

Petitioner has sold the secured asset without complying and/or any

breach of the Security Interest (Enforcement) Rules, 2002. We find that

in the present Petition, details with reference to the sale have not been

set out along with the necessary documents. We, therefore, asked Mr.

D'souza to bring on record all documents, if any, to show compliance of

the said Rules. Mr. D'souza has stated that he shall file an affidavit in

rejoinder to the reply filed by the State bringing all documents on record

by 10th August, 2023. The said statement is accepted.

3. We find that Mr. D'souza has also raised an issue that in the

present case, the State cannot claim any priority over the secured

creditor because after the attachment order passed by the State on 7 th

November, 2019, nothing further was done, especially in terms of the

Full Bench Judgment in the case of Jalgaon Janata Sahakari Bank Ltd

and Anr. Vs. Joint Commissioner of Sales Tax Nodal, 9 Mumbai and

Anr. reported in [(2022) 5 Mh.L.J. 691].

4. To meet this contention of the Petitioner, the State is also at

liberty to file a further affidavit in reply bringing on record what steps, if

AUGUST 03, 2023 Laxmi

3 WP 7022-21.doc

any, were taken by the State after the order of attachment was passed,

and especially keeping in mind the Full Bench Judgment in case of

Jalgaon Janata Sahakari Bank Ltd and Anr. (Supra).

5. The State shall file the further affidavit in reply, if any, on

or before 21st August, 2023 and serve a copy of the same on the

Advocates for the Petitioner.

6. Place the above matter on 24th August, 2023.

7. The parties are put to notice that the above Writ Petition

may be disposed of at the admission stage itself.

8. This order will be digitally signed by the Private Secretary/

Personal Assistant of this Court. All concerned will act on production by

fax or email of a digitally signed copy of this order.

[ M.M. SATHAYE, J.] [ B. P. COLABAWALLA, J.]

AUGUST 03, 2023 Laxmi