V.S.SUNITHA Vs. THE FEDERAL BANK LTD.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is the respondent in C.M.P. No. 771 of 2013 on the file of the Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Kottayam in a proceedings under the SARFAESI Act.

(2.) The brief facts of the case are as follows: The petitioner availed a loan of Rs.1,75,000/- from the second respondent Bank on 31.07.2009. An extent of 8.5 cents of property comprised in Survey No. 55/21B of Kulasekharamangalam Village was given as mortgage for the aforesaid loan. The loan was taken for a term of 5 years with monthly instalment of Rs.4,300/- and was sanctioned while he was working as an Accountant at Triton Technologies Pvt. Ltd., Palarivattom. He has paid the monthly instalments upto December, 2012. An amount of Rs.1,70,416/- was paid till 07.10.2013 and the balance amount due was Rs.1,05,537/-. Since the petitioner has lost her job, there was failure to pay the instalment from January, 2013 to April, 2013. The first respondent has filed Annexure A1 under Section 14(1) of the SARFAESI Act to take possession of the secured assets before the Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Kottayam. The Chief Judicial Magistrate, as per Annexure A2 order, appointed Ms. Anu Stephen as an Advocate Commissioner.

(3.) The learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the Court has no power to appoint an Advocate Commissioner to take possession of the property. He has also contended that the order passed under Section 14 of the Act appointing an Advocate Commissioner is illegal, in view of the amendment made to Section 14(1) (a). The relevant provision reads thus: