{"id":351443,"date":"2025-06-25T14:00:37","date_gmt":"2025-06-25T08:30:37","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=351443"},"modified":"2025-06-26T18:11:59","modified_gmt":"2025-06-26T12:41:59","slug":"calcutta-high-court-dm-upholds-uco-bank-sarfaesi-application-rejected-legal-news","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/06\/25\/calcutta-high-court-dm-upholds-uco-bank-sarfaesi-application-rejected-legal-news\/","title":{"rendered":"Calcutta High Court upholds rejection of UCO Bank\u2019s SARFAESI application by District Magistrate over Affidavit defects"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n

Calcutta High Court:<\/span> A petition was filed by UCO Bank (petitioner) challenging the order dated 04-12-2024 passed by the District Magistrate, Cooch Behar, whereby the application filed by the petitioner under Section 14<\/a> of the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002<\/a> (SARFAESI Act) seeking assistance in taking physical possession of a mortgaged property was rejected. Gaurang Kanth, J., held that there is no infirmity in the impugned order dated 04.12.2024 and granted the petitioner to file a fresh application under Section 14<\/a> of the SARFAESI Act<\/a> before the District Magistrate, duly supported by an appropriate affidavit strictly in compliance with the first proviso to Section 14(1) of the Act, read with the relevant Rules and Notifications.<\/p>\n

It is the case of the petitioner that respondent 2, the borrower had availed a loan facility from the petitioner-bank and failed to repay the same. To secure the said credit facilities, respondent 2 mortgaged certain immovable properties in favour of the petitioner. The loan account was classified as Non-Performing Asset (NPA) on 30-06-2019. The Bank contended that it had duly followed the statutory procedure after classifying the borrower\u2019s account as a Non-Performing Asset (NPA) on 30-06-2019 and had proceeded to initiate recovery measures under the SARFAESI Act. These included the issuance of a demand notice under Section 13(2), symbolic possession under Section 13(4), and a subsequent application filed before the District Magistrate on 6-07-2021 under Section 14 for physical possession of the secured assets.<\/p>\n

The borrower, i.e., respondent 2, meanwhile, had approached the Debt Recovery Tribunal under Section 17 of the Act, which was still pending. When the District Magistrate failed to dispose of the Section 14 application within a reasonable time, the petitioner filed an appeal before the Court, which directed the District Magistrate on 07-03-2024 to dispose of the application within thirty days. Despite the Court\u2019s direction, the District Magistrate delayed action, prompting the Bank to initiate contempt proceedings. However, just before the contempt notice was issued, the District Magistrate passed the impugned order on 04-12-2024, rejecting Section 14 application on several substantive grounds.<\/p>\n

The Court observed that the District Magistrate had rightly identified serious deficiencies and non-compliance with the statutory requirements. The impugned order highlighted five major flaws in the affidavit filed by the Bank\u2019s Authorised Officer. First, there was an inexplicable discrepancy in the timeline, ie., while the loan was allegedly sanctioned on 24-12-2019, the loan account was declared an NPA on 30-06-2019, a date preceding the sanction itself, suggesting either a grave factual error or possible misrepresentation. Second, the affidavit failed to disclose that part of the mortgaged property was agricultural land, although such land is exempt from the SARFAESI Act under Section 31(i). This mischaracterization was material, as the affidavit had incorrectly claimed that no agricultural land was involved.<\/p>\n

Third, the Bank failed to substantiate that it had duly considered and communicated the reasons for rejecting the borrower representation made under Section 13(3A), as mandated by clause (vii) of the first proviso to Section 14(1). Fourth, the affidavit claimed that a possession notice under Section 13(4) had been issued, but no such document or even the date of such notice was provided. Fifth, the affidavit did not include a mandatory declaration under clause (ix) of the first proviso to Section 14(1), affirming that the provisions of the Act and applicable Rules had been complied with. Furthermore, the affidavit lacked any reference to registration of the security interest with the Central Registry, which is a prerequisite for enforcement under Section 26D of the Act.<\/p>\n

The Court clarified that the role of the District Magistrate under Section 14 is ministerial and not adjudicatory. However, even in a ministerial capacity, the Magistrate must ensure that the affidavit accompanying a Section 14 application strictly adheres to the legal requirements laid down by the statute, the Rules (including Rule 8 of the Security Interest (Enforcement) Rules, 2002<\/a>), and relevant government notifications (such as the notification dated 17-09-2013). The presence of these essential particulars is a condition of precedent for invoking the Magistrate\u2019s jurisdiction. In this case, the affidavit defects were not merely procedural lapses but fundamental omissions that struck at the very root of the petitioner\u2019s entitlement to relief under Section 14.<\/p>\n

Rejecting the petitioner\u2019s argument that all relevant documents had been submitted and that any defect was curable, the Court held that statutory compliance could not be presumed or retroactively regularised. The affidavit\u2019s insufficiency rendered the entire application untenable. Thus, the Court upheld the District Magistrate\u2019s decision, finding no legal infirmity in the rejection order.<\/p>\n

Accordingly, the writ petition was dismissed. However, the Court granted the Bank liberty to file a fresh application under Section 14, this time accompanied by a proper affidavit in strict conformity with the statutory and regulatory requirements. The Court directed that if such a corrected application is made, it should be decided by the District Magistrate in accordance with law and within the timeframe prescribed by the statute.<\/p>\n

[UCO Bank v. District Magistrate, 2025 SCC OnLine Cal 4993<\/a>, decided on 19-06-2025<\/span>]<\/p>\n

\n

Advocates who appeared in this case:<\/p>\n

Mr. Rahul Mishra, Mr. Deborshi Dhar, Advocates for the Petitioner<\/span><\/p>\n

Mr. Nabankur Paul, Mr. Bikash Singha, Advocates for the State<\/span><\/p>\n

Mr. Debabrata Saha Roy, Adv Mr. Neil Basu, Adv Mr. Subhasish Misra, Adv Ms. Shreya Sarkar, Advocates for the added respondent<\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

The Court observed that since the jurisdiction of the District Magistrate under Section 14 of the Act, is not ministerial and not adjudicatory, such defects cannot be cured retrospectively or assumed to be merely procedural.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":67516,"featured_media":351451,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[3,10],"tags":[84090,84093,84094,72033,77305,84092,41120,84088,84091,84089],"class_list":["post-351443","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-casebriefs","category-highcourts","tag-affidavitcompliance","tag-assetrecovery","tag-bankinglitigation","tag-calcuttahighcourt","tag-debtrecovery","tag-districtmagistrate","tag-npa","tag-sarfaesiact","tag-section14sarfaesi","tag-ucobank"],"yoast_head":"\nCalcutta High Court upholds rejection of UCO Bank's SARFAESI application by DM over affidavit defects| SCC Times<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"Calcutta High Court rules that UCO Bank's SARFAESI application was rightly rejected due to non-compliant affidavit under Section 14.\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/06\/25\/calcutta-high-court-dm-upholds-uco-bank-sarfaesi-application-rejected-legal-news\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Calcutta High Court upholds rejection of UCO Bank\u2019s SARFAESI application by District Magistrate over Affidavit defects\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Calcutta High Court rules that UCO Bank's SARFAESI application was rightly rejected due to non-compliant affidavit under Section 14.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/06\/25\/calcutta-high-court-dm-upholds-uco-bank-sarfaesi-application-rejected-legal-news\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"SCC Times\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2025-06-25T08:30:37+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2025-06-26T12:41:59+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/06\/UCO-Bank-SARFAESI-application-rejection.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"886\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"590\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Arunima\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:title\" content=\"Calcutta High Court upholds rejection of UCO Bank\u2019s SARFAESI application by District Magistrate over Affidavit defects\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Arunima\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"5 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/06\/25\/calcutta-high-court-dm-upholds-uco-bank-sarfaesi-application-rejected-legal-news\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/06\/25\/calcutta-high-court-dm-upholds-uco-bank-sarfaesi-application-rejected-legal-news\/\",\"name\":\"Calcutta High Court upholds rejection of UCO Bank's SARFAESI application by DM over affidavit defects| SCC Times\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/06\/25\/calcutta-high-court-dm-upholds-uco-bank-sarfaesi-application-rejected-legal-news\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/06\/25\/calcutta-high-court-dm-upholds-uco-bank-sarfaesi-application-rejected-legal-news\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/06\/UCO-Bank-SARFAESI-application-rejection.webp\",\"datePublished\":\"2025-06-25T08:30:37+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2025-06-26T12:41:59+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/12b21fd8f65a572f39f27151710e16cb\"},\"description\":\"Calcutta High Court rules that UCO Bank's SARFAESI application was rightly rejected due to non-compliant affidavit under Section 14.\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/06\/25\/calcutta-high-court-dm-upholds-uco-bank-sarfaesi-application-rejected-legal-news\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/06\/25\/calcutta-high-court-dm-upholds-uco-bank-sarfaesi-application-rejected-legal-news\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/06\/25\/calcutta-high-court-dm-upholds-uco-bank-sarfaesi-application-rejected-legal-news\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/06\/UCO-Bank-SARFAESI-application-rejection.webp\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/06\/UCO-Bank-SARFAESI-application-rejection.webp\",\"width\":886,\"height\":590,\"caption\":\"UCO Bank SARFAESI application rejection\"},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/06\/25\/calcutta-high-court-dm-upholds-uco-bank-sarfaesi-application-rejected-legal-news\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Calcutta High Court upholds rejection of UCO Bank\u2019s SARFAESI application by District Magistrate over Affidavit defects\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\",\"name\":\"SCC Times\",\"description\":\"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/12b21fd8f65a572f39f27151710e16cb\",\"name\":\"Arunima\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/8375ad8b08b1cbd970f4484d3218d81f3222a0ee3e463210f657780cb13e9569?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/8375ad8b08b1cbd970f4484d3218d81f3222a0ee3e463210f657780cb13e9569?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Arunima\"},\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/scc-editor_9\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Calcutta High Court upholds rejection of UCO Bank's SARFAESI application by DM over affidavit defects| SCC Times","description":"Calcutta High Court rules that UCO Bank's SARFAESI application was rightly rejected due to non-compliant affidavit under Section 14.","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/06\/25\/calcutta-high-court-dm-upholds-uco-bank-sarfaesi-application-rejected-legal-news\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Calcutta High Court upholds rejection of UCO Bank\u2019s SARFAESI application by District Magistrate over Affidavit defects","og_description":"Calcutta High Court rules that UCO Bank's SARFAESI application was rightly rejected due to non-compliant affidavit under Section 14.","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/06\/25\/calcutta-high-court-dm-upholds-uco-bank-sarfaesi-application-rejected-legal-news\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2025-06-25T08:30:37+00:00","article_modified_time":"2025-06-26T12:41:59+00:00","og_image":[{"width":886,"height":590,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/06\/UCO-Bank-SARFAESI-application-rejection.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Arunima","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_title":"Calcutta High Court upholds rejection of UCO Bank\u2019s SARFAESI application by District Magistrate over Affidavit defects","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Arunima","Est. reading time":"5 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/06\/25\/calcutta-high-court-dm-upholds-uco-bank-sarfaesi-application-rejected-legal-news\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/06\/25\/calcutta-high-court-dm-upholds-uco-bank-sarfaesi-application-rejected-legal-news\/","name":"Calcutta High Court upholds rejection of UCO Bank's SARFAESI application by DM over affidavit defects| SCC Times","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/06\/25\/calcutta-high-court-dm-upholds-uco-bank-sarfaesi-application-rejected-legal-news\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/06\/25\/calcutta-high-court-dm-upholds-uco-bank-sarfaesi-application-rejected-legal-news\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/06\/UCO-Bank-SARFAESI-application-rejection.webp","datePublished":"2025-06-25T08:30:37+00:00","dateModified":"2025-06-26T12:41:59+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/12b21fd8f65a572f39f27151710e16cb"},"description":"Calcutta High Court rules that UCO Bank's SARFAESI application was rightly rejected due to non-compliant affidavit under Section 14.","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/06\/25\/calcutta-high-court-dm-upholds-uco-bank-sarfaesi-application-rejected-legal-news\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/06\/25\/calcutta-high-court-dm-upholds-uco-bank-sarfaesi-application-rejected-legal-news\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/06\/25\/calcutta-high-court-dm-upholds-uco-bank-sarfaesi-application-rejected-legal-news\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/06\/UCO-Bank-SARFAESI-application-rejection.webp","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/06\/UCO-Bank-SARFAESI-application-rejection.webp","width":886,"height":590,"caption":"UCO Bank SARFAESI application rejection"},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/06\/25\/calcutta-high-court-dm-upholds-uco-bank-sarfaesi-application-rejected-legal-news\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Calcutta High Court upholds rejection of UCO Bank\u2019s SARFAESI application by District Magistrate over Affidavit defects"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/","name":"SCC Times","description":"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/12b21fd8f65a572f39f27151710e16cb","name":"Arunima","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/8375ad8b08b1cbd970f4484d3218d81f3222a0ee3e463210f657780cb13e9569?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/8375ad8b08b1cbd970f4484d3218d81f3222a0ee3e463210f657780cb13e9569?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Arunima"},"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/scc-editor_9\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/06\/UCO-Bank-SARFAESI-application-rejection.webp","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":327137,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/07\/23\/jhc-dm-not-adjudicating-authority-sarfaesi-act-only-duty-to-assist-secured-creditor-taking-possession-property\/","url_meta":{"origin":351443,"position":0},"title":"District Magistrate not adjudicating authority under SARFAESI Act; only duty to assist secured creditor in taking possession of property: Jharkhand HC","author":"Arushi","date":"July 23, 2024","format":false,"excerpt":"The Court stated that by delaying the disposal of the application filed by the petitioner, the District Magistrate is frustrating the intent of law, which should not be.","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Jharkhand High Court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/03\/Jharkhand-High-Court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/03\/Jharkhand-High-Court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/03\/Jharkhand-High-Court.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/03\/Jharkhand-High-Court.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":197587,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/06\/27\/section-17-of-sarfaesi-act-provides-remedy-before-drt-against-the-order-of-district-magistrate\/","url_meta":{"origin":351443,"position":1},"title":"Section 17 of SARFAESI Act provides remedy before DRT against the order of District Magistrate","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"June 27, 2018","format":false,"excerpt":"Madhya Pradesh High Court: In a matter arising under Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Securities Interest (SARFAESI) Act, 2002, a Division Bench comprising of Hemant Gupta, CJ and Atul Sreedharan, J. allowed a writ appeal and set aside the Orders of the learned Single Judge as\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":344645,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/03\/29\/magistrates-jurisdiction-section-14-sarfaesi-act-kerala-hc\/","url_meta":{"origin":351443,"position":2},"title":"Magistrate\u2019s jurisdiction under S. 14 of SARFAESI Act doesn\u2019t involve adjudication; passing orders in printed format with just filled-in details is unjustifiable: Kerala HC","author":"Apoorva","date":"March 29, 2025","format":false,"excerpt":"\u201cThe power under Section 14 of SARFAESI Act has significant consequences, which is why it is entrusted to high-ranking officials like the District Magistrate or Chief Judicial Magistrate.\u201d","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Kerala High Court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/03\/Kerala-High-Court-1.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/03\/Kerala-High-Court-1.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/03\/Kerala-High-Court-1.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/03\/Kerala-High-Court-1.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":358279,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/08\/29\/ph-hc-directs-execution-of-order-under-section-14-sarfaesi-act\/","url_meta":{"origin":351443,"position":3},"title":"Sitting on files due to non-prescription of time frame for execution of Section 14 order frustrates object of SARFAESI Act: Punjab & Haryana HC","author":"Editor","date":"August 29, 2025","format":false,"excerpt":"\u201cNon-Performing Assets are a huge burden on the public exchequer, banking and financial system, and, thus, prompt enforcement of recovery mechanism under the SARFAESI Act is paramount for liquidity in the system\u201d.","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"execution of order under S. 14 SARFAESI Act","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/execution-of-order-under-S.-14-SARFAESI-Act.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/execution-of-order-under-S.-14-SARFAESI-Act.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/execution-of-order-under-S.-14-SARFAESI-Act.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/execution-of-order-under-S.-14-SARFAESI-Act.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":366699,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/11\/14\/sarfaesi-act-secured-creditor-not-bear-for-police-assistance-expense-in-getting-possession-of-secured-assets-raj-hc\/","url_meta":{"origin":351443,"position":4},"title":"Section 14 SARFAESI Act | Magistrate cannot direct secured creditor to bear police assistance expense in getting secured assets’ possession: Rajasthan High Court","author":"Editor","date":"November 14, 2025","format":false,"excerpt":"\u201cThe police directed the petitioner to deposit Rs 6,34,383 for providing police assistance in taking possession of the secured asset whereas the loan amount to be recovered was only Rs 9,90,000.\u201d","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"police expense in getting possession of secured assets","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/11\/police-expense-in-getting-possession-of-secured-assets.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/11\/police-expense-in-getting-possession-of-secured-assets.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/11\/police-expense-in-getting-possession-of-secured-assets.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/11\/police-expense-in-getting-possession-of-secured-assets.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":306330,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/11\/03\/delhi-high-court-remedy-section-1310-sarfaesi-act-cannot-considered-remedy-independent-rdb-act-legal-news\/","url_meta":{"origin":351443,"position":5},"title":"Delhi High Court| Remedy under Section 13(10) of SARFAESI Act cannot be considered as a remedy independent of the RDB Act","author":"Arunima","date":"November 3, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"The Court is unable to accept that the legislative intent is to provide parallel regimes for the recovery of debts. The provisions of Section 13(10) of the SARFAESI Act, thus, cannot be interpreted in the manner as contended on behalf of the petitioner.","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"delhi high court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/10\/delhi-high-court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/10\/delhi-high-court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/10\/delhi-high-court.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/10\/delhi-high-court.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]}],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/351443","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/67516"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=351443"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/351443\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/351451"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=351443"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=351443"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=351443"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}