The High Court
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P. (C) No.5643 of 2024 ----- HDB Financial Services PVT LTD., a company incorporated under the companies act having its head office at Ground Floor, Zenith House, Keshavrao Khadye Marg, Mahalakshmi, Mumbai-400034 and one of its branch at Nile Complex, 1st, Shop-03, Hazaribagh Road, Kantatoli, Ranchi-834001, Jharkhand through its authorised officer Puja Sur, D/o Amaresh Sur, R/o 59A, Central Road, Kolkata-700032, presently posted as a Legal Associate, HDB Financial Service Ltd., 6th Floor, Thapar House, P.O.-Lalbazar, P.S.-Burrabazar, 25 Brabourne Road, Kolkata-700001. -Versus- .......... Petitioner. 1. The State of the Secretary, Department of Personnel, Administrative Reforms and Rajbhasha, Government of Jharkhand, Ranchi Jharkhand through 2. The Deputy Commissioner, Ranchi. 3. Bhagwati Enterprises through Sanjiv Kumar, S/o Ram Naresh Choudhary, Shop No.201 Baralal Street Upper Bazar, P.O.-G.P.O., P.S.-Ranchi (Sadar), District-Ranchi. 4. Sanjiv Kumar, S/o Ram Naresh Choudhary, R/o Near Home Gauri Office Harmu Housing Colony, Argora, P.O. & P.S.-Argora, District-Ranchi. 5. Poonam Chaudhary, W/o Sanjiv Kumar, R/o Near Home Gauri Office Harmu Housing Colony, Argora, P.O. & P.S.- Argora, District-Ranchi. .......... Respondents. -----
Legal Reasoning
there is no dispute with respect to the mandate of Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act, 2002 and hence if the proceeding in question has not yet been concluded by the respondent no.2, the same will be concluded without further delay. 6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and keeping -4- W.P. (C) No.5643 of 2024 in view the provisions of Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act, 2002 as well as the ratio laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Balkrishna Rama Tarle (supra), the respondent no.2 is directed to expedite the proceeding in question and to conclude the same as soon as possible and not beyond the period of 30 days from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order.
Arguments
CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH SHANKAR ----- For the Petitioner : Mr. Bharat Kumar, Advocate For the State : Mr. Anish Kr. Mishra, A.C. to Sr. S.C.-I ----- Order No.04 Date: 23.10.2024 1. The present writ petition has been filed for issuance of direction upon the respondent no. 2- the Deputy Commissioner, Ranchi to forthwith dispose of the application preferred by the petitioner under Section 14 of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (in short, “the SARFAESI Act, 2002”). 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is a non-banking financial company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956. The respondent nos.3, 4 & 5 are the borrowers who applied for loan from the petitioner-company for enhancement of their business and were granted financial assistance to the tune of Rs.36,35,000/- & Rs.5,15,000/- through loan account nos.10819123 and 17034264 respectively. The said loan was sanctioned to the said respondents subject to the terms and conditions which were accepted by them. After availing the loan, the said respondents failed to abide by the terms and conditions of the loan agreement and thus committed default in repayment of the loan amount with respect to the aforesaid loan accounts. Accordingly, the said loan accounts were classified as Non-Performing Assets (NPA) on 02.02.2023 and the petitioner-company issued a demand notice under Section 13(2) read with Section 13(13) of the SARFAESI Act, 2002 on 16.02.2023 through registered post. Despite the said notice, the said respondents ignored payment of outstanding dues to the petitioner-company due to which the possession notice dated 18th April, 2023 issued under Section 13(4) of the SARFAESI Act, 2002 read with rule 8(1) of the Security Interest (Enforcement) Rules, 2002 was served to them through registered post which was also published in ‘Hindi’ -2- W.P. (C) No.5643 of 2024 and ‘English’ daily newspapers on 22.04.2023. The representative of the petitioner-company tried to take the possession of the mortgaged property, however the borrowers i.e., the respondent nos.3, 4 & 5 did not cooperate in the same. Under the said circumstance, the petitioner-company preferred an application under Section 14(1) & 14(2) of the SARFAESI Act, 2002 before the respondent no.2 on 01.11.2023. Thereafter, the respondent no.2 vide press release dated 19.01.2024, ordered the authorised officer of the petitioner-company for publication of notice in two daily newspapers. Accordingly, the notice was published in the newspaper on 26.02.2024. However, no further action has been taken by the respondent no. 2 in this regard which has compelled the petitioner to prefer the present writ petition. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner places reliance on a judgment rendered by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Balkrishna Rama Tarle (Dead) through legal representatives and another Vs. Phoenix Arc Private Limited and Others reported in (2023) 1 SCC 662, paragraph-16 of which reads as under: “16. The statutory obligation enjoined upon the CMM/DM is to immediately move into action after receipt of a written application under Section 14(1) of the SARFAESI Act from the secured creditor for that purpose. As soon as such an application is received, the CMM/DM is expected to pass an order after verification of compliance of all formalities by the secured creditor referred to in the proviso in Section 14(1) of the -3- W.P. (C) No.5643 of 2024 SARFAESI Act and after being satisfied in that regard, to take possession of the secured assets and documents relating thereto and to forward the same to the secured creditor at the earliest opportunity. As observed and held by this Court in NKGSB Coop Bank Ltd. V. Subir Chakravarty, the aforesaid act is a ministerial act. It cannot brook delay. Time is of the essence and this is the spirit of the special enactment.” 4. It is further submitted that the respondent no.2 is under statutory obligation to assist the petitioner-company i.e. the secured creditor in taking possession of the security assets. The exercise under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act, 2002 was to be completed by the respondent no. 2 within a period of 30 days from the date of the application which in the given circumstance could not have exceeded the period of 60 days in aggregate. Keeping the said proceeding pending for unlimited period frustrates the provision of the SARFAESI Act, 2002. Under the said circumstance, the respondent no. 2 may be directed to conclude the proceeding under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act, 2002 without any further delay. 5. Mr. Anish Kr. Mishra, learned A.C. to Sr. S.C.-I appearing on behalf of the respondent nos.1 and 2, submits that
Decision
7. The writ petition is, accordingly, disposed of with aforesaid direction. Arpit/ (Rajesh Shankar, J.) -5- W.P. (C) No.5643 of 2024