Sri Somnath Nandy vs Punjab National Bank & Ors
2021 Latest Caselaw 4690 Cal

08.09.2021.
Item No. 97.
Court No.13
   ap                     W.P.A. No. 12718 of 2021
                        (Through Video Conference)
                            Sri Somnath Nandy
                                  Versus
                        Punjab National Bank & Ors.

                Mr. Mohinoor Rahaman,
                Ms. Maria Rahaman.
                                              ..For the petitioner.
                Ms. Lipika Ghosh,
                Mr. Ashis Kumar Mukherjee,
                Mr. Saurabh Prasad.
                                                  ...For the Bank.
                Mr. Subhabrata Datta,
                Mr. Abdus Salam.
                                                ...For the State.
                Mr. Somnath Naskar,
                Ms. Priyanka Saha.
                                   ...For the private respondent.

The writ petitioner has purchased immovable

property under a SARFEASI sale conducted by the

United Bank of India now known as Punjab National

Bank. The physical possession of the property was not

taken and the property was put up for sale. The writ

petitioner purchased the said property and which is in

occupation and possession of the principal

borrowers/guarantors.

By a judgment and order dated 7th January,

2020 passed in W.P. No. 23899 (W) of 2019, a Co-

ordinate Bench of this Court has directed the Bank to

move the District Magistrate under Section 14 of the

Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets

and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (in

short SARFEASI Act, 2002) and seek assistance in

taking physical possession of the property.

On an argument made that the Bank has lost

the right to move under Section 14 of the SARFEASI

Act, 2002, since after sell and registration of

convenience in favour of the writ petitioner, the Co-

ordinate Bench of this Court has held that the Bank

has not lost its right to maintain the application under

Section 14 of the SARFEASI Act, 2002. The Bank had

already made such application in January 2018 prior

to sale.

The District Magistrate for some reason does not

appear to have passed orders under Section 14 of the

SARFEASI Act, 2002.

Counsel for the private respondent/borrower

would argue that in terms of the decision of a Co-

ordinate Bench of this Court dated 1st September,

2017 passed in W.P. No. 21814 (W) of 2017 (United

Bank of India & Anr. - Vs. - State of West Bengal &

Ors.), the Bank has lost its right to move under

Section 14 of the SARFEASI Act, 2002 if sale is

conducted without taking possession of the property.

It is submitted that the said decision was not

considered or placed before the Co-ordinate Bench of

this Court dated 7th January, 2020. However the said

order of the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court has

neither been challenged in appeal nor has any review

been sought till date.

Hence, the said order dated 7th January, 2020

has reached its finality.

The District Magistrate, South 24 Parganas shall

forthwith take possession of the immovable property

purchased by the petitioner situated and lying at

49/C, Anath Nath Deb Lane, Kolkata - 700 037 and

hand over possession of the same to the writ petitioner

on behalf of the Bank.

Any other claim by the writ petitioner against

the Punjab National Bank, has not been decided by

the Court and is left open for being dealt with in

accordance with law.

With the aforesaid observations, the instant writ

petition shall stand disposed of.

There will be no order as to costs.

All parties shall act on the server copy of this

order duly downloaded from the official website of this

Court.

(Rajasekhar Mantha, J.)