Bombay High Court Dismisses Writ Petition Challenging SARFAESI Proceedings Against Guarantors — Personal Guarantee Not a 'Right or Interest in Property' Under Section 17(1) of SARFAESI Act, 2002. Guarantors Cannot Challenge Possession Notice Before Debt Recovery Tribunal Under SARFAESI; Remedy Lies Under RDDB Act, 1993.

High Court: Bombay High Court Bench: BOMBAY In Favour of Prosecution
  • 7
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The judgment concerns two writ petitions filed by Mahindra Chandrasen and Sharad Chandrasen (petitioners) against Union Bank of India and other respondents, including Rajat Infrastructure Private Ltd., Zoom Developers Private Ltd., and Zoom Vallabh Steel Ltd. The petitioners were personal guarantors for loans taken by the corporate respondents. The bank initiated proceedings under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (SARFAESI Act) against the corporate borrowers and also sought to recover from the guarantors. The petitioners challenged the possession notice issued under Section 13(4) of the SARFAESI Act and the proceedings under Section 14 before the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate. The main legal issue was whether a personal guarantor has the right to file a petition under Section 17(1) of the SARFAESI Act and whether the guarantor is entitled to notice under Section 14. The court analyzed the provisions of the SARFAESI Act and the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993 (RDDB Act). It held that a personal guarantee does not create a right or interest in the secured asset, and therefore a guarantor cannot invoke Section 17(1) of the SARFAESI Act. The remedy for a guarantor lies before the Debt Recovery Tribunal under the RDDB Act. The court also held that no notice is required to be given to the guarantor under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act before taking possession. The court dismissed the writ petitions, holding that the petitioners had an alternative remedy under the SARFAESI Act and that the petitions were not maintainable. The court also disposed of the civil applications.

Headnote

A) SARFAESI Act - Section 17(1) - Right to file petition - Personal Guarantor - A personal guarantor does not have a right or interest in the secured asset, and therefore cannot file a petition under Section 17(1) of the SARFAESI Act challenging the possession notice. The remedy for a guarantor lies before the Debt Recovery Tribunal under the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993. (Paras 10-15)

B) SARFAESI Act - Section 14 - Notice to Guarantor - The Chief Metropolitan Magistrate or District Magistrate acting under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act is not required to issue notice to the guarantor before taking possession of the secured asset. The guarantor's right to be heard arises only after possession is taken, before the Debt Recovery Tribunal. (Paras 16-20)

C) SARFAESI Act - Section 13(2) - Notice to Guarantor - A notice under Section 13(2) of the SARFAESI Act is not required to be served on a personal guarantor, as the provision applies only to the borrower who has created a security interest. (Paras 21-25)

D) SARFAESI Act - Alternative Remedy - Writ Petition - A writ petition challenging SARFAESI proceedings is not maintainable when an alternative statutory remedy is available under the SARFAESI Act, unless exceptional circumstances exist. (Paras 26-30)

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether a personal guarantor can challenge the possession notice issued under Section 13(4) of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (SARFAESI Act) by filing a petition under Section 17(1) of the SARFAESI Act, and whether the guarantor has a right to be heard before the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The court dismissed both writ petitions, holding that personal guarantors cannot file a petition under Section 17(1) of the SARFAESI Act and are not entitled to notice under Section 14. The court also held that the writ petitions were not maintainable due to the availability of an alternative remedy. The civil applications were disposed of.

Law Points

  • Personal guarantee does not create a right or interest in property
  • SARFAESI Act Section 17(1) not applicable to guarantors
  • Guarantors cannot challenge possession notice under SARFAESI
  • Debt Recovery Tribunal has jurisdiction over guarantors under Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act
  • 1993
  • Section 13(2) notice under SARFAESI not required for guarantors
  • Section 14 of SARFAESI Act does not require notice to guarantor
  • Writ petition not maintainable when alternative remedy available under SARFAESI Act.
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2017:BHC-AS:7391-DB

Writ Petition No.5252 of 2015 with Civil Application No.3188 of 2015 and Writ Petition No.54 of 2015

2017-03-10

2017:BHC-AS:7391-DB

Mahindra Chandrasen and Sharad Chandrasen

Union Bank of India, Rajat Infrastructure Private Ltd., Zoom Developers Private Ltd., Zoom Vallabh Steel Ltd.

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Writ petitions challenging SARFAESI proceedings initiated by Union Bank of India against personal guarantors.

Remedy Sought

Petitioners sought to quash the possession notice under Section 13(4) and proceedings under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act.

Filing Reason

Petitioners, as personal guarantors, challenged the bank's action of taking possession of secured assets without giving them an opportunity to be heard.

Issues

Whether a personal guarantor can file a petition under Section 17(1) of the SARFAESI Act challenging the possession notice. Whether a guarantor is entitled to notice under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act before possession is taken. Whether the writ petition is maintainable in view of the alternative remedy available under the SARFAESI Act.

Submissions/Arguments

Petitioners argued that they were personal guarantors and had a right to be heard before possession was taken, and that they could challenge the possession notice under Section 17(1) of the SARFAESI Act. Respondent bank argued that a personal guarantee does not create a right or interest in the secured asset, and therefore the guarantor cannot invoke Section 17(1). The bank also argued that no notice is required under Section 14, and that the petitioners had an alternative remedy before the Debt Recovery Tribunal.

Ratio Decidendi

A personal guarantee does not create a right or interest in the secured asset, and therefore a guarantor cannot invoke Section 17(1) of the SARFAESI Act. The remedy for a guarantor lies before the Debt Recovery Tribunal under the RDDB Act. No notice is required to be given to the guarantor under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act before taking possession.

Judgment Excerpts

A personal guarantee does not create a right or interest in the secured asset. The remedy for a guarantor lies before the Debt Recovery Tribunal under the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993. No notice is required to be given to the guarantor under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act before taking possession.

Procedural History

The petitioners filed Writ Petition No.5252 of 2015 along with Civil Application No.3188 of 2015, and the bank filed Writ Petition No.54 of 2015. The court heard both petitions together and dismissed them on 10 March 2017.

Acts & Sections

  • Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002: Section 13(2), Section 13(4), Section 14, Section 17(1)
  • Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993:
  • Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings) Act, 1970:
  • Companies Act, 1956:
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Allows Trust Elections to Proceed Despite Challenge Under Section 41A of Bombay Public Trusts Act, 1950 — Interim Relief Denied as No Prima Facie Case of Irregularity Established. Court Held That the Assistant Charity Commissioner...
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Dismisses Writ Petition Challenging SARFAESI Proceedings Against Guarantors — Personal Guarantee Not a 'Right or Interest in Property' Under Section 17(1) of SARFAESI Act, 2002. Guarantors Cannot Challenge Possession Notice Before...