ANTO K.O. Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Challenge in these petitions is directed against the orders passed by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate in M.C. Nos. 214 of 2019 and 67 of 2019. By the impugned orders, the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate rejected the challenge raised by the petitioners with regard to the maintainability of the application filed by the 2nd respondent herein, the South Indian Bank Ltd., Under Section 14 of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 ('SARFAESI Act' for the sake of brevity). The petitioners have also challenged the sustainability of the consequential order passed on the same date by the learned Magistrate as per which, an Advocate Commissioner was appointed to take delivery of the secured assets. As identical questions are raised in both these petitions, they are taken up and disposed of together.

(2.) Briefly stated, the facts, material for adjudication of the present petitions, may be stated thus:

(3.) On receiving information about the filing of the petition, the petitioners herein entered appearance before the learned Magistrate and filed a detailed objection. It was contended that the application under Section 14 was not maintainable. According to the petitioners, the application was not signed by the competent person authorized under the Act. It was further contended that the affidavit filed in support of the application did not contain the requisite details as mandated under the proviso to Section 14(1) of the SARFAESI Act. It was also asserted that the property against which the assistance was sought was not a secured asset. Another contention raised by the petitioners was that the notice to the respondents under Section 13(2) of the Act had not been served on all the parties and the failure to comply with Rule 3 of the Security Interest (Enforcement) Rules, 2002 is fatal.