NALIN VASUDEV SOMPURA Vs. DISTRICT MAGISTRATE & 2

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr.Aditya Gupta, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr.Pranav Trivedi, learned Assistant Government Pleader for respondent No.1-District Magistrate, Patan and Mr.Anip Gandhi, learned counsel for respondent No.2 - Bank. Though served, no one appears for respondent No.3.

(2.) By way of this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has challenged the order dated 30.08.2014 passed by District Magistrate, Patan upon an application filed by respondent No.2 - Bank under Section 14 of the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets & Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (hereinafter referred to as "the SARFAEI Act").

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the amended provisions of Section 14 of the Act, more particularly the first proviso and 9 requirements, which are prescribed in the said provision, which have not been examined properly by the District Magistrate while passing the impugned order dated 30.08.2014. It was further submitted that as the order passed under Section 14 of the Act is not appealable, present petition is maintainable under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. It was further submitted that the petitioner has also not been given any opportunity of being heard before passing the impugned order.