Smfg India Credit Company Limited ... vs Additional District Magistrate
2023 Latest Caselaw 10826 MP

                                                             1
                                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                    AT INDORE
                                                     WP No. 15800 of 2023
                             (SMFG INDIA CREDIT COMPANY LIMITED FORMERLY KNOWN AS FULLERTON INDIA CREDIT
                                COMPANY LIMITED THROUGH A Vs ADDITIONAL DISTRICT MAGISTRATE AND OTHERS)

                          Dated : 13-07-2023
                                Shri Nilesh Agrawal, learned counsel for the petitioner .

                                Shri Rohit Sharma, learned counsel for the Respondent [CAVEAT].

Heard on the question of admission and interim relief. In the present petition, the petitioner has assailed the order dated 28.06.2023 passed by respondent no.1 in SARFAESI Case No. 0031/B-

121/2022-23 whereby the application filed by the petitioner u/S 14 of the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act(referred to as "SARFAESI Act" hereinafter) has been rejected.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that in the earlier round of litigation, vide order dated passed in W.P. No. 10672/2023, petition was allowed by quashing the orders dated 16.01.2023 and 05.04.2023 and the respondent no.1 was directed to decide the application filed by the petitioner

u/S 14 of the SARFAESI Act without affording any opportunity of hearing to the respondent no. 2 to 5 and without considering any of the contentions or submission or documents at any stage of the proceedings.

3. Inspite of the aforesaid clear directions which are based on the judgment of the Apex Court, the respondent no.1 went ahead in deciding the application filed u/S 14 of the SARFAESI Act and has interpreted the order passed by this Court and held that the respondent no.1 had no authority to decide the application since another application is pending before the Debt Signature Not Verified Signed by: SEHAR HASEEN Signing time: 7/14/2023 6:33:50 PM

Recovery Tribunal, Jabalpur. The said action of the respondent no.1 is contrary to the directions issued by this Court vide order dated 08.05.2023. The respondent no.1 has exceeded its jurisdiction in interpreting the order on its own. In fact, as per Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act, the respondent no.1 is required to assist the secured creditor in taking possession of the secured assets. The authority is not required to give notice either to the borrower or to the third party. He is only required to verify from the Bank whether notice under Section 13(2) of the SARFAESI Act has been issued/served or not. If the authority was not satisfied with the order passed by this Court, they could have moved appropriate application for modification/recalling /review of the

order dated 08.05.2023, but they have not done so.

4. In such circumstances, the respondent no.1 is directed to remain personally present before this Court on the next date of hearing i.e. 24.07.2023 to explain as to why the authority has interpreted the order on its own, brushing aside the directions issued by this Court.

5. List the case on 24.07.2023.

                               (S. A. DHARMADHIKARI)                                         (HIRDESH)
                                        JUDGE                                                  JUDGE

                          sh




Signature Not Verified
Signed by: SEHAR HASEEN
Signing time: 7/14/2023
6:33:50 PM