Icici Bank Ltd v. District Magistrate & ORS

CWP-10687-2018 -1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP-10687-2018 Date of Decision: May 10, 2018 ICICI Bank Limited .....Petitioner

Versus

District Magistrate, Fatehgarh Sahib and others ......Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHEKHER DHAWAN 1.

To be referred to the Reporters or not?

Yes/No 2.

Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? Yes/No.

3.

Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes/No .......

Present:

Mr.Sandeep Suri, Advocate for the petitioner. ........

SURYA KANT, J.

Notice of motion to respondent Nos.1 and 2 only at this stage. [2] Mr.Sahil Sharma, DAG, Punjab, who is present in Court, accepts notice. Let two sets of paper-book be handed over to him during the course of day failing which this order shall be automatically recalled and the writ petition shall be deemed to have been dismissed for non-prosecution. [3] In view of the nature of the order, which we propose to pass, there is no need to seek any counter reply from the official respondents or to serve the private respondents at this stage as no order on merits prejudicial to their interest is being passed.

[4] Petitioner-ICICI Bank Limited seeks a direction for implementation of the order dated 29.07.2015 passed by the District Meenu 2018.05.14 12:45 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document chandigarh Magistrate, Fatehgarh Sahib, in exercise of powers under Section 14 of the

CWP-10687-2018 -2Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (for brevity, 'the SARFAESI Act'). It is not disputed by learned counsel for the petitioner-Bank that the order of the District Magistrate could not be given effect due to an ad interim injunction granted in a pending civil suit, in which the Bank is not a party. [5] Since there is legal impediment for giving effect to the order passed under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act, the writ petition is disposed of without expressing any views on merits with liberty to the petitionerBank to move applications before the Civil Court, namely, (i) its impleadment as a party-respondent; (ii) for vacation of stay; and (iii) to question the maintainability of the suit.

The Civil Court is directed to decide those applications in accordance with law and after hearing the parties concerned as early as possible but not later than two months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. If the Bank finds that some other suit has also been filed by the borrowers, their family members or their relatives, it may approach the said Court in the same manner, as directed above.

( SURYA KANT ) JUDGE May 10, 2018 ( SHEKHER DHAWAN ) meenuss JUDGE 1.

Whether speaking/reasoned ?

Yes/No 2.

Whether reportable ?

Yes/No Meenu 2018.05.14 12:45 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document chandigarh