CSB BANK LTD Vs. TALUK OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Catholic Syrian Bank has approached this Court being aggrieved by the refusal on the part of the 2nd respondent to permit them to effect mutation in respect of an item of property which was purchased by the Bank in proceedings initiated by them invoking the provisions of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act , 2002. (' SARFAESI Act ' for short).

(2.) In the year 2003, the petitioner offered financial assistance to a certain Jojo Thomas and he had executed a mortgage by deposit of title deeds as is evident from Ext.P1. Default was committed and proceedings under the SARFAESI Act were initiated. Later, the property was brought to sale and as there were no bidders, the bank purchased the property, and a sale certificate was registered with the SRO, Cherthala on 04.01.2012 as is evident from Ext.P4. According to the petitioner, they have approached the 2nd respondent for effecting mutation of the property and submitted Exts.P6 and P6(a). However, the same was refused on the ground that the 4th respondent has filed a complaint in the year 2007 before the Judicial Magistrate of the First Class-III, Kottayam, under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act arraying the above Jojo Thomas as an accused and since the accused had absconded, the property was attached under Section 83 of the Cr.P.C.

(3.) According to the petitioner, the mortgage was in the year 2003 and the criminal complaint was filed only in the year 2007 and hence, the attachment which was effected subsequently cannot have any precedence over the right of the auction purchaser, who has obtained ownership of the property pursuant to a sale effected under the SARFAESI Act . It is submitted that the sale has not been subjected to any challenge and the same has become final.