Bhola Nath Chal Ms. Soni Ojha, Ms. Sambrita B. Chatterjee …for & Ors. v. D. Visalakshi & anr. reported in (2019) 20 SCC 47 & Ors.

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, Chandernagore, is thus set aside. Learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Hooghly is directed to dispose of the said Misc.