BAJARANG SHYAMSUNDER AGARWAL Vs. CENTRAL BANK OF INDIA
LAWS(SC)-2019-9-28
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Decided on
September 11,2019
Bajarang Shyamsunder Agarwal
Appellant
VERSUS
CENTRAL BANK OF INDIA
Respondents
Referred Judgements :-
SHANTI DEVI VS. AMAL KUMAR BANERJEE [REFERRED TO]R V BHUPALPRASAD VS. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH [REFERRED TO]
KANAIYALAL LALCHAND SACHDEV VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [REFERRED TO]
HARSHAD GOVARDHAN SONDAGAR VS. INTERNATIONAL ASSETS RECONSTRUCTION CO LTD [REFERRED TO]
Cited Judgements :-
SANJEEV RASTOGI VS. STATE OF U. P. [LAWS(ALL)-2023-8-160] [REFERRED TO]PALLERLA RAMESH VS. ANDHRA BANK [LAWS(TLNG)-2021-11-140] [REFERRED TO]
MODINASAB INDIKAR VS. BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF INDIAN OVERSEAS BANK [LAWS(BOM)-2020-2-223] [REFERRED TO]
POTLURI LAKSHMI RAJESWARI VS. PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK [LAWS(APH)-2023-8-71] [REFERRED TO]
SAI HEMAJA AEROBRICKS PVT. LIMITED VS. STATE BANK OF INDIA [LAWS(TLNG)-2024-1-44] [REFERRED TO]
SHRI SANTOSH SAW MIL VS. ALLAHABAD BANK [LAWS(P&H)-2022-10-22] [REFERRED TO]
HINDUSTAN PETROLEUM CORPORATION LTD. VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(ALL)-2023-4-5] [REFERRED TO]
LLOVEGEET DHURIA VS. STATE BANK OF INDIA [LAWS(P&H)-2022-9-128] [REFERRED TO]
M. EZHILMARAN VS. K. KARUNANIDHI [LAWS(MAD)-2021-12-101] [REFERRED TO]
ASSET RECONSTRUCTION COMPANY (INDIA) LTD VS. DISTRICT MAGISTRATE/ DISTRICT COLLECTOR THIRUVALLUR, THIRUVALLUR DISTRICT [LAWS(MAD)-2020-9-763] [REFERRED TO]
MOHAN SUNDARAM VS. PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK [LAWS(KER)-2022-12-216] [REFERRED TO]
SRI CHAKRAPANI DALL MILL CONTRACTORS VS. CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE-CUM-PRINCIPAL ASST. SESSIONS JUDGE [LAWS(APH)-2020-9-89] [REFERRED TO]
CYGNET MACHINIBG AND ENGINEERING PRIVATE LIMITED VS. AANAG ENTERPRISES PRIVATE LIMITED [LAWS(CAL)-2025-1-31] [REFERRED TO]
SHAJI VS. CHATHUKUTTY [LAWS(KER)-2021-10-161] [REFERRED TO]
PALLERLA RAMESH \ K.RAMASWAMY VS. STATE OF TELANGANA [LAWS(TLNG)-2022-4-5] [REFERRED TO]
PALLERLA RAMESH VS. ANDHRA BANK [LAWS(TLNG)-2022-4-81] [REFERRED TO]
BANK OF BARODA VS. GOPAL SHRIRAM PANDA [LAWS(BOM)-2021-3-50] [REFERRED TO]
RADHARANI BOSE VS. BANK OF BARODA [LAWS(CAL)-2023-8-122] [REFERRED TO]
SAYEDAHMED S/O ALLAHBAKSH VS. BANK OF BARODA [LAWS(KAR)-2022-1-110] [REFERRED TO]
TAMIL NADU MERCANTILE BANK LTD VS. DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, THIRUVALLUR [LAWS(MAD)-2020-9-871] [REFERRED TO]
M/S. SAI DURGA AGROTECH INDUSTRIES VS. BANK OF BARODA ERSTWHILE VIJAYA BANK [LAWS(TLNG)-2021-1-131] [REFERRED TO]
CANARA BANK VS. SACHIN SHYAM [LAWS(KER)-2022-12-99] [REFERRED TO]
JUDGEMENT
N.V. Ramana, J. -
(1.)Leave granted.
(2.)The present appeal arises out of the impugned order dated 31.12.2014 in Case No. 42/SA/2012 of the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Esplanade, Mumbai rejecting the application of the intervenor who is the appellant-tenant herein seeking to stay the execution of order passed under Section 14 of The Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 [hereinafter referred to as the 'SARFAESI Act'] for taking possession of the property in question.
(3.)The property in question is a residential flat admeasuring about 1020 sq. ft., situated in Andheri (West), Mumbai (hereinafter referred to as the "secured asset"). The secured asset was mortgaged by respondent no. 2-borrower/landlord with the respondent no. 1-bank in equitable mortgage, by depositing title deeds on 20.05.2000, with an intention to secure the credit facility. When the respondent no. 2-borrower/landlord failed to make the due repayment of the said credit facilities, the respondent no.1-bank classified the debt as a "Non-Performing Asset (NPA)". Thereafter, on 30.04.2011 a statutory Demand Notice under Section 13 (2) of the SARFAESI Act was issued to respondent no. 2-borrower/landlord demanding payment of Rs.10,72,10,106.73 (Rupees Ten Crores Seventy-Two Lacs Ten Thousand One Hundred Six and Seventy Three Paisa Only) which was due as on 30.04.2011.
(2.)The present appeal arises out of the impugned order dated 31.12.2014 in Case No. 42/SA/2012 of the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Esplanade, Mumbai rejecting the application of the intervenor who is the appellant-tenant herein seeking to stay the execution of order passed under Section 14 of The Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 [hereinafter referred to as the 'SARFAESI Act'] for taking possession of the property in question.
(3.)The property in question is a residential flat admeasuring about 1020 sq. ft., situated in Andheri (West), Mumbai (hereinafter referred to as the "secured asset"). The secured asset was mortgaged by respondent no. 2-borrower/landlord with the respondent no. 1-bank in equitable mortgage, by depositing title deeds on 20.05.2000, with an intention to secure the credit facility. When the respondent no. 2-borrower/landlord failed to make the due repayment of the said credit facilities, the respondent no.1-bank classified the debt as a "Non-Performing Asset (NPA)". Thereafter, on 30.04.2011 a statutory Demand Notice under Section 13 (2) of the SARFAESI Act was issued to respondent no. 2-borrower/landlord demanding payment of Rs.10,72,10,106.73 (Rupees Ten Crores Seventy-Two Lacs Ten Thousand One Hundred Six and Seventy Three Paisa Only) which was due as on 30.04.2011.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.