Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. Madras High Court
  4. /
  5. 2017
  6. /
  7. January

The Authorised Officer/Chief Manager Bank Of Baroda Nambiyur Branch Gobichettypalayam Taluk Erode District 638 458 vs The District Registrar Office The District Registrar Gobichettypalayam Erode Joint Sub Registrar I Office Of The District Registrar Gobichettypalayam Erode District ,The Joint Sub Registrar I Office Of The District Registrar Gobichettypalayam Erode District

Madras High Court|01 August, 2017
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 01.08.2017 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.DURAISWAMY W.P.No.14095 of 2017 The Authorised Officer/Chief Manager Bank of Baroda Nambiyur Branch Gobichettypalayam Taluk Erode District 638 458 ... Petitioner v.
1 The District Registrar Office of the District Registrar Gobichettypalayam Erode District
2 The Joint Sub Registrar-I Office of the District Registrar Gobichettypalayam Erode District ... Respondents Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a writ of certiorarified mandamus, calling for the records of the second respondent dated 24.05.2017 in Na Ka No.1862/E/2017 and quash the same and consequently direct the second respondent to register the sale certificate dated 24.05.2017 issued by the petitioner.
For Petitioner : Mr.S.Mohan For Respondents : Mr.R.Rajeswaran Spl. Govt. Pleader O R D E R The petitioner has filed the above writ petition to issue a Writ of certiorarified mandamus to call for the records of the 2nd respondent dated 24.05.2017, to quash the same and consequently direct the 2nd respondent to register the sale certificate dated 24.05.2017 issued by him.
2.1 According to the petitioner, their bank is providing cash, credit and letters of credit facilities for carrying on business and other purposes. The borrower, viz., M/s.Anbu Thangal Maligai, represented by its partners, obtained a sum of Rs.11,85,95,000/- as loan from the bank and in consideration thereof, the partner and the guarantor, viz., K.Udayakumar, deposited the title deeds and created equitable mortgage over the secured assets by registered memorandum of deposit of title deeds in favour of the Bank on 31.12.2009. Similarly, other guarantors have also executed mortgage deeds for the due repayment of the loan availed by the said M/s.Anbu Thangal Maligai in favour of the bank.
2.2 According to the petitioner, the repayment of loan amount by the borrower was not regular and hence, the account was declared as Non Performing Asset on 30.11.2010 under the provisions of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (hereinafter referred to as 'SARFAESI Act').
2.3 According to the petitioner, notice under section 13(2) of the SARFAESI Act was issued to the borrower and possession was taken under section 13(4) of the SARFAESI Act. In the SARFAESI proceedings, the property was brought to sale and was sold on 15.03.2017 to M/s.Chakravarthy Thuhil Maaligai and 3 others. The sale was also confirmed in favour of the auction purchaser. However, when the sale certificate was presented for registration, the 2nd respondent refused to register the same on the ground that there was prior attachment by the Assistant Registrar of Chits, Erode. in proceedings Nos.13/2011, 14/2011 and 15/2011.
3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that it is settled position that the secured creditor shall have the priority over the other creditors. Therefore, the order of attachment passed by the Assistant Registrar of Chits, Erode, shall not stand in the way of the 2nd respondent registering the sale certificate in favour of the auction purchaser.
4. Supporting the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner, .Mr.R.Rajeswaran, learned Special Government Pleader, appearing for the respondents also submitted that in view of the settled position that the secured credit shall have the priority over the other creditor, the 2nd respondent should have registered the sale certificate presented for registration.
5. In view of the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side, I direct the 2nd respondent to register the sale certificate dated 24.05.2017 within three days from the date of presentation of the document. It is also made clear that the petitioner shall pay the necessary stamp duty and the registration charges for registering the sale certificate before the 2nd respondent.
costs.
With these observations, the writ petition is disposed of. No 01.08.2017 Index: Yes/No Note : Issue copy of the order by 04.08.2017 Rj To
1 The District Registrar Office of the District Registrar Gobichettypalayam Erode District
2 The Joint Sub Registrar-I Office of the District Registrar Gobichettypalayam Erode District M.DURAISWAMY,J.
Rj W.P.No.14095 of 2017 01.08.2017
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

The Authorised Officer/Chief Manager Bank Of Baroda Nambiyur Branch Gobichettypalayam Taluk Erode District 638 458 vs The District Registrar Office The District Registrar Gobichettypalayam Erode Joint Sub Registrar I Office Of The District Registrar Gobichettypalayam Erode District ,The Joint Sub Registrar I Office Of The District Registrar Gobichettypalayam Erode District

Court

Madras High Court

JudgmentDate
01 August, 2017
Judges
  • M Duraiswamy