FIRST LAW

The Civil Procedure Code, 1908 - Order 7 Rule 11 (d) – Rejection of Plaint - Relief of reject the plaint only against one of the defendant(s) – Held, Such a relief “cannot be entertained” in exercise of power under Order 7 Rule 11(d) of CPC - the relief of rejection of plaint in exercise of powers under Order 7 Rule 11(d) of CPC cannot be pursued only in respect of one of the defendant(s) - the plaint has to be rejected as a whole or not at all, in exercise of power Order 7 Rule 11 (d) of CPC - the plaint as presented must proceed as a whole or can be rejected as a whole but not in part.

The Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 - Section 14 -  Insofar as the non mentioning of some of the items of the properties in the affidavit filed under Section 14 (1) is concerned, it is evident that only five items of properties were situated within the jurisdiction of the learned Magistrate. The clear wording in Section 14 would show that the assistance can be sought by the secured creditor of any of the secured asset. Furthermore, the orders impugned would reveal that the learned Magistrate was aware of the averment in the affidavit that the secured creditor was intending to proceed against only five items of properties as against the 11 items mentioned in Section 13 (2) notice. Thus, there is no suppression or misstatement as contended by the petitioner.

The Constitution of India – Article 226 - The Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Act, 2002 - The Security Interest (Enforcement) Rules, 2002 - Rule 8 (1) - Section 13 (4) - There may be sometimes genuine reasons for the borrowers for being late in payments but such issues can be addressed by the appropriate forum provided for dealing with these matters. The extraordinary jurisdiction of Court is not to be invoked in such cases.

Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 -  S.18(1) Second Proviso -  It is either the borrower or the guarantor, who is liable to make pre-deposit on an appeal filed by him / her against the order of the DRT.

Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 - Sections 14 & 17(4A) - the observations as made in the order impugned after paragraph 11 had been rather unnecessary and the learned Single Judge, with respect, has been in error in issuing generalised directions and that too, to the extent that the borrowers have a right to be heard in the proceedings under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act.

Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 - Order 7 Rule 11(d) - Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 - Section 34 - Ownership Flats (Regulation of the promotion of construction, sale, management and transfer) Act, 1963 (Maharashtra)

Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 - the Act override all other provisions of the law which are inconsistent therewith, therefore, will prevail over the provisions of all other Statutes and so as the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 to the extent of inconsistencies.

Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 - S. 14 -  Chief Judicial Magistrate has no jurisdiction to grant time for payment of the debt due to the secured creditor  in a proceedings under Section 14 of the Act.

Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of  Security Interest Act, 2002 -  Section 34 -  the High Court could not have directed the Bank to deposit Rs.25 Lacs in an interest earning deposit and the profits of the said deposit to enure to the benefit of the successful party. Such a direction was wholly uncalled for.

Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 -  Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 -  the SARFAESI proceedings are in the nature of enforcement proceedings, while arbitration is an adjudicatory process and, therefore, the proceeding which has been initiated under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act is maintainable.