AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
C. Jayachandran, J
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the respondent-Bank.
The short grievance espoused by the learned counsel for the petitioner is that, the land having an extent of 49 Ares and another 30 Square Meters, which has not been mortgaged to the respondent-Bank is also sought to be proceeded against under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act (hereinafter referred as ‘SARFAESI Act’) vide Ext.P8 order. The learned counsel would make this submission based on the boundaries shown in Ext.P7 petition filed before the Chief Judicial Magistrate concerned. The learned counsel would also clarify that the petitioner has no grievance in proceeding against the secured assets, which have been mortgaged with the respondent-Bank.
Learned counsel for the respondent-Bank would contend that the petitioner has got an effective remedy under Section 17 of the SARFAESI Act. Besides, as per the instructions received by the learned counsel, the said 49 Ares and 30 Square Meters also form part of the mortgaged property.
Having heard the learned counsel appearing on both sides, this Court would clarify that all further proceedings pursuant to Ext.P8 shall only be in respect of 66.34 Ares of land and 1.73 Ares of land made mention of in paragraph No.5.1 of Ext.P8 order. The above referred 49 Ares and 30 Square Meters shall not be proceeded against in furtherance of Ext.P8, unless it forms part of 66.34 Ares and 1.73 Ares afore referred, which have been admittedly mortgaged with the respondent-Bank.
With this clarification, this OP(C) will stand disposed of. The suit, O.S. No.119/2023, will proceed untrammelled by any of the observations made in this case.