IN THE COURT OF G.S.

SEKHON
CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, SANGRUR
UNIQUE IDENTIFICATION NO.PB0287

CNR No.PBSG03-000097-2025 CRM/22/2025

DCB Bank Ltd.

Versus

Vimal Kumar and Anr.

Present: Sh. Jitender Bisla, Advocate, counsel for the applicant.

ORDER

Heard on the application under Section 14 of The

Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of

Security Interest Act, 2002, amended as on date moved by the applicant

on the ground that the responents approached the applicant and had

availed housing loan/non-housing loan credit facilities of Rs.14,75,000/-

under Loan agreement no.DRBLLOD00578110 dated 15.02.2023. The

responents in order to secure the repayment of the said financial

assistance have created an equitable mortgage by deposit of original title

deed dated 07.01.2020 with regard to property/Houe No.E3 being

constructed on plot admeasuring 62.50 Sq. Yards as detailed mentioned in

para no.3 of the application in respect of the secured Asset as envisaged in

Section 58(f) of Transfer of Property Act with the applicant with an

intention to secure the said loan facility and in favour of applicant

alongwith memorandum of deposit of title deeds signifying respondents

intention of creating equitable mortgage over the said property. The

respondents have miserably failed to maintain the repayment schedule and

committed default in payment of various installments. Upon the defaults

committed by respondents, their account was classified as “Non-

Performing Asset” on 04.04.2024. Resultantly, total claim of the applicant

against respondents/borrowers accumulated to Rs.17,69,415/- as per

statement of account dated 28.12.2024. A notice dated 19.06.2024 under

Sections 13(2) of The SARFAESI Act was served upon the respondents,

thereby calling upon them to make repayment of outstanding amount

alongwith future interest, but the respondents failed to discharge their

liability within the stipulated period of 60 days and therefore, the

applicant are desirous of taking physical possession of the secured Asset

in peaceful manner under the provisions of 13(4) of the SARFAESI Act,

2002 and same was published in newspaper of English language and

vernacular language on 20.10.2024 by taking assistance of this Court as

the respondents had committed default in repayment of the said loan.

Hence, the present application.

2. I have heard the learned counsel for the applicant and

perused the entire record on file. In order to secure the possession of

secured assets i.e. property as fully detailed in para no.3 of the

application, the applicant has craved for the indulgence of this Court vide

application in hand moved under Section 14 of The SARFAESI Act,

2002.

3. Before I delve upon the factual matrix entailing into the

application in hand, it would be apposite to refer to the follwing

observations of Hon’ble Apex Court as given in “Phoenix ARC Pvt. Ltd.

& Anr. Vs. The State of Maharashtra & Ors.” in Writ petition No.9749 of

2021 whereby Hon’ble Bombay High Court has pleased to held that there

is no requirement to issue notice to either borrower or a 3 rd party under

Section 14 and there is also no need of reply filed by them and even they
have no right to be heard and in para no.17 of the order of the Hon’ble

High Court has prescribed what is required to be seen under section 14:-

Section 14(1) of the Act mandates the Chief Metropolitan

Magistrate to pass suitable orders for taking possession of the secured

asset and to forward it to the secured creditor.

4. Further in case law titled as M/s R.D.Jain and Co. Vs.

Capital First Ltd. & Ors. 2022(3) RCR(Civil)781 whereby the Hon’ble

Supreme Court of India has pleased to held that “ In view of the above

discussion and as observed hereinabove when the powers to be exercised

by the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate are at par with the

powers to be exercised by the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate [Section

17(2) of Cr.P.C] and the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate and Additional

Chief Metropolitan Magistrate shall be subordinate to the Sessions

Judge(Section 19 of the Cr.P.C) and the steps to be taken by the Chief

Metropolitan Magistrate under 14 of the SARFAESI Act as observed

hereinabove are ministerial in nature and does not involve any

adjudicatory process and there is no element of any quasi-judicial

function,we see no reason to take a different view than the view taken by

the Bombay High Court in the impugned judgment. We hold that the

expression “Chief Metropolitan Magistrate” as appearing in 14 of the

SARFAESI Act shall deem to mean and include Additional Chief

Metropolitan Magistrate for the purpose of 14 of the SARFAESI Act.”

5. Further in this concern, in Authorized Officer, Indian Bank

Vs. D.Visalakshi and Anr. 2019(4) RCR(Civil)952, the Hon’ble Supreme

Court of India has held that it would be a meaningful, purposive and

contextual construction of Section 14 of the 2002 Act, to include CJM as

being competent to assist the secured creditor to take possession of the

secured asset. It is further held that CJM is equally competent to deal with

the application moved by the secured creditor under Section 14 of the

2002 Act.

6. Further in case law Standard Chartered Bank Vs. V.Noble

Kumar and others 2014(7) RCR(Criminal)1524, wherein Hon’ble Apex

Court has been pleased to cull out the pre-requisite conditions required to

be complied with by the applicant in order to secure the relief claimed

under Section 14 of SARFAESI Act:-

“26. An analysis of the 9 sub-clauses of the proviso

which deals with the information that is required to
be furnished in the affidavit filed by the secured
creditor indicates in substance that (i) there was a
loan transaction under which a borrower is liable to
repay the loan amount with interest,(ii) there is a
security interest created in a secured asset
belonging to the borrower,(iii) that the borrower
committed default in the repayment,(iv) that a
notice contemplated under Section 13(2) was infact
issued,(v) inspite of such a notice, the borrower did
not make the repayment,(vi) the objections of the
borrower had infact been considered and rejected,
(vii) the reasons for such rejection had been
communicated to the borrower etc.

27. The satisfaction of the Magistrate

contemplated under the second proviso to Section
14(1) necesssarily requires the Magistrate to
examine the factual correctness of the assertions
made in such an affidavit but not the legal niceties
of the transaction. It is only after recording of his
 satisfaction the Magistrate can pass appropriate
orders regarding taking of possession of the secured
asset.

7. Adverting to the facts of application in hand, perusal of file

reveals that the applicant has placed on record copy of power of attorney

dated 06.11.2023 vide which Mr.Nikunj Mathur has been authorized to

institute the present application. The applicant has placed on record copy

of loan agreement dated 15.02.2023, as per which, loan amounting to a

total sum of Rs.14,75,000/- was granted to the respondents. The applicant

has also placed on record the copy of sale deed dated 07.01.2020. The

aforesaid loan agreement clearly established the fact that there exists

relationship of creditor and debtor between the applicant and the

respondents. It is further evident from the aforesaid loan agreement dated

15.02.2023 and sale deed dated 07.01.2020 property has been mortgaged

by the respondents in favour of applicant at the time of availing loan

facility. Further copy of notice dated 19.06.2024 prove that notice under

Section 13(2) of The SARFAESI Act, 2002 was served upon the

respondents before taking the possession of the property in question. It is

evident from aforesaid notice under Section 13(2) of SARFAESI Act,

2002 that outstanding amount of Rs.17,69,415/- as on 28.12.2024 was

claimed from the respondents. The applicant has further placed on record

the copies of newspaper dated 20.10.2024 wherein notices were duly

published after taking symbolic possession of the property in question.

8. All the documents detailed hereinabove clearly establish the

fact that all the pre requisite conditions as stipulated in proviso appended

with Section 14 of SARFESI Act have been complied with in letter and
spirit by applicant at the time of filing the application in hand. Thus it is

evidently clear that case in hand is fit case for issuance of warrants of

possession.

9. Let Tehsildar of the concerned area is hereby appointed as

receiver with directions to take possession of the secured asset i.e. all that

piece and parcel of the property as fully detailed mentioned in the

application.

10. The concerned SHO is directed to provide the polie

assistance including one lady police official and the receiver is directed to

submit his report within three months from the date of order in the Court.

Receiver shall give 15 days notice to the authorized officer of the secured

creditor and the borrowers/gurantors. Receiver is also directed to serve

this notice by way of affixation 15 days prior to taking over possession.

This notice shall be affixed on the outdoor or at such conspicuous place of

the immovable property and photographs of that place shall be taken

including display of notice on property.

11. Receier is also empowered to break open locks in case

premises is found locked and in that eventuality, he shall prepare

inventory with regard to the items kept inside the premises and hand over

them alongwith one list duly signed by the witnesses and by the receiver

to the borrower, if present at the site, and one copy duly signed by the

witnesses and by the receiver will be annexed with his report.

Photographs of the locked premises before taking over and after taking

over and photographs of the items kept inside the premises shall also be

taken by the receiver and be annexed with the report alongwith negatives,

if any and a certificate under Section 65-B of the Indian Evidence Act.
 Broken locks shall be sealed in cloth pulanda and be deposited with

applicant bank. The expenses on this account shall be borne by the

applicant bank.

12. After taking over the subject property, it should be handed

over the authorized officer of applicant. Accompanying witnesses shall

sign the proceedings. Receiver to ensure that while executing the order

there is no stay from any Court in respect of the mortgaged property. One

copy of this order alongwith copy of application be given to the Receiver

for compliance, another copy of order be given to petitione rbank and one

copy of order be sent to SHO concerned by office.

13. After the appointment of Receiver nothing survives in the

petition. Receiver is directed to file the compliance report in the office

within three months from today, which be placed on the file and then the

file be consigned to record room after due compliance.

14. For removal of doubts, it is made clear that

objections/applications, if any, may be preferred by any borrower,

gurantor, mortgagor, lessee or any other aggrieved person before the Debt

Recovery Tribunal having jurisdiction, as per the amended provisions of

Section 17 of the SARFAESI Act. File be consigned to the record after

due compliance.

Dated: 03.02.2025 (G.S.Sekhon)

Chief Judicial Magistrate
Sangrur
Unique Identification No.PB0287
Jagparvesh Stenographer-II

Digitally signed
by JAGPARVESH
JAGPARVESH Date:
2025.02.05
12:48:02 +0530