SHIYAS Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) (W.P.(C) 41394/2018, W.P.(C). 41751/2018 & W.P.(C). No. 2544 of 2019) 1. The jurisdictional competence (or the lack of it) of the Court of an Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, to issue orders under S. 14 of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act ('the SARFAESI Act' for brevity) has been spot lighted in these Writ Petitions.

(2.) These three Writ Petitions call attention to a singular issue as to whether the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ernakulam, could have exercised jurisdiction or powers under S. 14 of the SARFAESI Act; and the petitioners impugn the orders, passed by the said Magistrate under this section, offering assistance to the respondent-Banks to take physical possession of certain properties, admittedly equitably mortgaged by them to the said Banks, as being without jurisdiction and hence null and void.

(3.) The petitioners contend, edificed on the afore said section, that it is either the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate or the District Magistrate, who alone are empowered to exercise jurisdiction or to issue orders under it and therefore, that the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, without an express notification being issued by the High Court under S. 12(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.P.C. for short), could not have assumed jurisdiction nor have issued the impugned orders, providing assistance to the respondent-Banks to take physical possession of the secured assets in question.