38.6c New Delhi, India, Monday, February 23, 2026
Top Stories Supreme Court
Political NEWS Legislative Corner Celebstreet International Videos
Subscribe Contact Us
close
Judiciary

Magistrate not Required to Request Permission from Company Court While Handing Over Possession u/s 14 of the SARFAESI Act, 2002: SC

By Atharwa Gauraha      09 November, 2020 08:21 PM      0 Comments
Magistrate not Required to Request Permission from Company CourtWhile Handing Over Possession u/s 14 of the SARFAESI Act, 2002: SC

The Supreme Court held that a magistrate exercising jurisdiction under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act, 2002 is not necessary to obtain permission from the Judge of the Company Court before ordering the transfer of possession of the properties.

The bench consisting of Justice L. Nageswara Rao, Hemant Gupta, and Ajay Rastogi stated that under the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, a company court exercising jurisdiction under the Companies Act has no control over the sale of a secured asset by a secured creditor in the exercise of powers available to that creditor.

In this case, the borrower company was issued a notice under Section 13(2) SARFAESI Act 2002, demanding an amount of Rs. 309.91 crores. Meanwhile, another creditor initiated winding up proceedings against this company before the High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad. The company judge passed an order of winding up and an Official Liquidator was appointed.

In the meantime, the bank filed an application with the Chief Judicial Magistrate under the SARFEASI Act, 2002 based on section 14 for the appointment of a receiver to take over physical custody of the land. The property was taken into custody by the Advocate Commissioner, appointed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate.

In an interim order, in the written petition lodged by the creditor corporation, the High Court directed the property to be restored on the ground that the Chief Judicial Magistrate was unable to order the delivery of the property without receiving permission from the Company Court (High Court).

The Apex court bench thus noted, while setting aside the interim order:

"The interim order passed by the High Court is on the basis that the Magistrate could not have directed the possession to be taken without seeking permission from the Company Court. This Court in Pegasus Assets Reconstruction Private Limited v. Haryana Concast Limited and Another (2016) 4 SCC 47, concluded that a Company Court exercising jurisdiction under the Companies Act has no control in respect of the sale of a secured asset by a secured creditor in the exercise of powers available to such creditor under SARFAESI Act, 2002. Therefore, there is no requirement for the Magistrate exercising power under Section 14 SARFAESI Act to seek permission from the Company Judge before directing handing over of possession of a property."

In Pegasus Assets Reconstruction Private Limited, the Court held that, according to the provisions of the SARFAESI Act, the company judge should not intervene in a proceeding by a secured creditor to realize its secured interests.



Share this article:



Leave a feedback about this
TRENDING NEWS

allahabad-hc-awards-10-lakh-compensation-for-custodial-death-of-minor-in-pilibhit-jail
Trending Judiciary
Allahabad HC Awards ₹10 Lakh Compensation for Custodial Death of Minor in Pilibhit Jail [Read Order]

Allahabad High Court awards ₹10 lakh compensation for custodial death of a minor in Pilibhit jail, holding the State absolutely liable.

23 February, 2026 04:24 PM
amicus-curiae-sidharth-luthra-urges-supreme-court-to-revise-draft-criminal-practice-rules-in-light-of-bnss-bns-and-bsa-reforms
Trending Legal Insiders
Amicus Curiae Sidharth Luthra Urges Supreme Court To Revise Draft Criminal Practice Rules In Light Of BNSS, BNS & BSA Reforms [Read Order]

Amicus Curiae Sidharth Luthra urges the Supreme Court to adopt revised Draft Criminal Practice Rules 2026 in line with BNSS, BNS and BSA reforms.

23 February, 2026 04:38 PM

TOP STORIES

nobody-should-believe-anybody-before-marriage-sc-cautions-against-pre-marital-physical-relationships
Trending Judiciary
“Nobody Should Believe Anybody Before Marriage”: SC Cautions Against Pre-Marital Physical Relationships

Supreme Court cautions young adults on pre-marital relationships in a bail plea over rape on false promise of marriage; suggests mediation.

17 February, 2026 04:47 PM
allahabad-hc-refers-advocate-for-criminal-contempt-after-alleged-scandalous-remarks-during-bail-hearing
Trending Judiciary
Allahabad HC Refers Advocate for Criminal Contempt After Alleged Scandalous Remarks During Bail Hearing [Read Order]

Allahabad High Court refers advocate for criminal contempt over alleged scandalous remarks during a bail hearing in Uttar Pradesh.

17 February, 2026 05:15 PM
sc-declines-interference-in-case-concerning-tribal-village-entry-bans-on-pastors
Trending Judiciary
SC Declines Interference in Case Concerning Tribal Village Entry Bans on Pastors

Supreme Court refuses to interfere in plea against tribal village entry bans on pastors, asks petitioner to exhaust remedies under PESA Act.

17 February, 2026 05:35 PM
delhi-hc-sets-aside-dismissal-of-copyright-suit-over-local-commissioners-visit-to-additional-premises-expunges-findings-of-collusion-against-counsel
Trending Judiciary
Delhi HC Sets Aside Dismissal Of Copyright Suit Over Local Commissioner’s Visit To Additional Premises; Expunges Findings Of Collusion Against Counsel [Read Judgment]

Delhi High Court sets aside Commercial Court order dismissing copyright suit over Local Commissioner’s visit; expunges collusion findings against counsel.

17 February, 2026 06:53 PM

ADVERTISEMENT


Join Group

Signup for Our Newsletter

Get Exclusive access to members only content by email