Vaidhai Agarwal @ Sonu Kumari ... vs The District Magistrate
2023 Latest Caselaw 6029 Cal

08.09.2023          IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
 DL-01            CONSTITUTIONAL WRIT JURISDICTION
(Sanjay)                  APPELLATE SIDE
Ct.no.11


                           WPA 12679 of 2023
                                with
                             CAN 1 of 2023

                  Vaidhai Agarwal @ Sonu Kumari Kedia
                                  Vs.
                          The District Magistrate,
                       Paschim Bardhaman & Ors.


                  Mr. Sumitava Chakraborty,
                  Mr. Bijoy Bag          ...for the petitioner.

                  Mr. Santanu Kumar Mitra,
                  Mr. Abhishek Banerjee         ...for the State.

                  Mr. Siddhartha Sharma,
                  Mr. Shantanu Mitra,
                  Mr. Rishav Dutt,
                  Mr. Aman Katanuka,
                  Ms. Shalini Basu              ...for the Bank.

                  Mr. Subhrangsu Panda,
                  Ms. Ina Bhattacharyya,
                  Ms. Mithu Singha Mahapatra,
                  Mr. Debanjan Das
                          ...for the respondent nos. 5,6,8 and 9.

One M/s. Sarva Mangalam Gajanan Steel Pvt.

Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as the Company) is a

company owned by the members of the petitioner's

family. The petitioner's mother, since deceased was

one of the co-sharers of the Company.

The Company availed of the credit facility from

Allahabad Bank, which was subsequently merged

with Indian Bank. The said loan has not been paid.

Consequently, a proceeding under Section 13 of the

Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets

and Enforcement of Security Interest Actd, 2002 ( in

short, the SARFAESI Act) was initiated against the

owners of that company including the petitioner's

mother, since deceased and even the bank authority

took steps under section 14 of the SARFAESI Act.

The writ petitioner has challenged the entire

proceedings and the notices issued in connection

thereto on the ground that the bank has proceeded

against a dead person say, her deceased mother.

During the pendency of the proceeding, the bank

has issued a fresh notice dated 11.07.2023 under

Section 13(2) of the SARFAESI Act against the

petitioner and other co-sharer of the company. From

the notice dated 11.07.2023, it would be explicit that

the bank authority has cancelled and/or revoked all

the previous notices issued under the SARFAESI Act.

Mr. Sharma, learned advocate for bank submits

that the bank has abandoned the proceedings

initiated on the basis of the earlier notices issued

under the SARFAESI Act and initiated a fresh

proceeding under the SARFAESI Act.

In view of such sequence of the facts, the writ

petition stands dismissed as infructuous. There shall

be no order as to costs.

In view of the order passed in this writ petition,

the application for interim order being CAN 1 of 2023

is also dismissed.

Urgent photostat certified copy of this judgment

and order, if applied for, be given to the parties on

fulfilling necessary formalities.

(Partha Sarathi Chatterjee, J.)