MOIDEEN KOYA Vs. PEGASUS ASSETS RECONSTRUCTION CO.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners challenge Ext.P8 order passed by the Registrar of the Debts Recovery Tribunal 1, Ernakulam, declining to register the application preferred by the petitioners against the notice of dispossession served by the Advocate Commissioner on 5/6/2024. The Registry objected to the same on the ground that a consolidated Securitisation Application has been filed by four tenants.

(2.) It is to be noticed that all four applicants are tenants of the borrower occupying the secured asset. The dismissal of a consolidated application filed by multiple tenants, regarding the same cause of action, challenging the enforcement measures of the secured creditor under Sec. 17 of the SARFAESI Act, on the sole ground that separate applications must be filed by each tenant, is legally unsustainable, for multiple reasons.

(3.) The Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (SARFAESI Act) provides a comprehensive framework for creditors to enforce security interests while also establishing safeguards for aggrieved parties, including tenants. Sec. 17(1) explicitly states that "any person (including borrower)" aggrieved by measures under Sec. 13(4) may apply to the Debts Recovery Tribunal (DRT). The use of the term "any person" is broad and inclusive, encompassing not just borrowers but also third parties like tenants whose possessory or leasehold rights are affected by the secured creditor's actions.