GHANSHAYAMBHAI MANEKLAL THAKKAR Vs. JAIN SAHAKARI BANK LTD.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By way of present application, applicants have requested to initiate proceedings under the provisions of Contempt of Courts Act , 1971 for breach of the order dtd. 4/5/2022 passed by this Court in Special Civil Application No.8674 of 2022.

(2.) Learned advocate Mr. Paresh M. Modi appearing for the applicants would submit that subsequent to order passed by this Court, the applicants received a notice from Court Commissioner of learned Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, N.I. Act Court No.34, Ahmedabad, wherein proceedings under the provisions of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (hereinafter to be referred as ' SARFAESI Act ') to hand over the possession on 14/8/2022, but not by the respondent-Bank. He, therefore, would submit that there is clear breach of the order passed by this Court. He, therefore, would submit that the appropriate orders may be passed under the provisions of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971.

(3.) On the other hand, learned advocate Mr. Sandip Bhatt appearing for learned advocate Mr. Dharmesh Gurjar for respondent- Bank would submit that respondent-Bank has committed no contempt and has obeyed the order in its true sense. He would submit that the applicants were fully aware about the notice issued by the learned Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, N.I. Act Court No.34, Ahmedabad wherein proceedings under the SARFAESI Act were pending. He would further submit that only the Magistrate has power to issue notice for possession in the proceedings under the SARFAESI Act . He would further submit that by a communication No. 18/26/2021- EO (SM-II), Government of India, dtd. 7/7/2022, the Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances & Pensions Department of Personnel & Training Secretariat of the Appointments Committee of the Cabinet has handed over the additional charge of DRT-1, Ahmedabad to DRT-2, and therefore, the Bank requested to the learned Magistrate to issue notice where the proceedings were pending, and accordingly, notice was issued on 27/7/2022. The notice was served to the applicants, and therefore, applicants were fully aware about the notice dtd. 27/7/2022, by which, the possession was sought to be taken on 14/8/2022. He would further submit that after receiving the notice, applicants immediately filed an application on 4/8/2022 to take up the proceedings pending before the DRT-I, and accordingly, the matter was listed on board for hearing on 6/8/2022. The request was made for staying further action, however, the matter was further fixed for hearing on 10/8/2022, but no stay was granted. Thereafter, the possession has been taken away on 14/8/2022. He, therefore, would submit that in absence of stay granted by the Court, the possession of the property was taken away. He, therefore, would submit that respondent-Bank has obeyed the order in its true sense, and therefore, urged to drop contempt proceedings as the notice was issued.