Ashok Kumar Ghosh Ms. Soni Ojha, Ms. Sambrita B. Chatterjee …for & Ors. v. D. Visalakshi & anr. reported in (2019) 20 SCC 47 & Ors.
Case at a glance
- Bench
- SUBHASIS DASGUPTA
Outcome
Disposed of
application stands disposed of
Provisions considered
Judgment
Reliance is placed by Ms. Soni Ojha, learned advocate appearing for the petitioner, on a decision rendered by Apex Court in the case of Authorised Officer, Indian Bank vs. D. Visalakshi & anr. reported in (2019) 20 SCC 47, wherein purposive and contextual, construction of Section 14 of the Act was stressed upon. In view of such decision, learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, and Chief Metropolitan Magistrate were held to be competent to assist the secured creditor, to take possession of the secured assets. Reliance is also placed to unreported decision, rendered by a Coordinate Bench of this Court in the case of Sri Arupeswar Chatterjee & ors. vs. Bank of Baroda & ors. vide W.P. No.8615 (W) of 2015 and The Authorised Officer, DCB Bank Limited and anr. Vs. Dinesh Kumar Goswami & anr. vide C.O.549 of 2022 wherein the same view was taken, restricting delegation of power on such issue either by District Magistrate or Chief Judicial Magistrate to any other Magistrate.
When statute has specifically authorised, naming such dignitaries, to take possession or control of secured assets in application of provisions of Section 14(1) of the Act, referred hereinabove, such function has to be necessarily, discharged by the dignitaries specifically named in the Act itself, and not by any 4 other officer, unless specifically conferred with such power to that effect. Learned Chief Judicial Magistrate being competent and only authorised to deal with the application under Section 14(1) of the Act, there cannot be any other order directing re-presentation of the application before any other Magistrate, within whose statutory jurisdiction, the subject property under reference may be situated. The order impugned returning the application for presentation of the same before the learned A.C.J.M, Srerampore, is thus set aside. Learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Hooghly is directed to dispose of the said Misc.
Operative part
Case independently and expeditiously as possible in accordance with the law. The petitioner is directed to make communication of this order to the learned court below as well as to the opposite parties and their learned advocate in the court below. With this observation/direction, the revisional application stands disposed of. Urgent certified photostat copy of this order, if applied for, be given to the parties as expeditiously as possible on compliance of all necessary formalities. (Subhasis Dasgupta, J.) 5
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: application stands disposed of
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.