DEVIKA Vs. SYNDICATE BANK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner are respondent in C.M.P.No.597 of 2009 on the file of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Coimbatore. The petitioners herein filed this petition to quash the above proceedings.

(2.) The contention of the petitioners is that the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Coimbatore has no jurisdiction to pass the order dated 20.08.2010 in C.M.P.No.597 of 2009. The lower Court is has no jurisdiction to entertain an application filed by the respondent Bank under Sec. 14 (1) of the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (herein after referred as SARFAESI Act). Further contention is that mandatory notice under Sec. 13 (2) of the Act was not served individually to the petitioner. Further, the notice was sent to the Power of Attorney Mr.C.N.Padmanabhan, father of the petitioner, who is R4 in C.M.P.No.597 of 2009. The notice issued to the father, Power of Attorney has not been mentioned in what capacity it was been sent to him. Further it is contended that the Power of Attorney is a forged one as per Finger Print Bureau Report dated 10.10.2011. The respondent bank suppressing the sale dated 08.06.2009, which is under challenge in S.A.No.102 of 2009 on the file of the Debt Recovery Tribunal (DRT), Coimbatore has filed the above petition. Further, when the notice was issued to them under Sec. 13(2) of the SARFAESI Act by the respondent bank before the Debt Recovery Tribunal (DRT), Coimbatore, and hence they are not estopped to contend that Sec. 13(2) notice was not served to them. Further 13(4) Possession Notice issued by the respondent bank has been challenged before the Debt Recovery Tribunal (DRT), Coimbatore in OA (S) 42 of 2005. Hence, prayed to quash or setaside the impugned order dated 20.08.2010 in C.M.P.No.597 of 2009.

(3.) Further the learned counsel for the petitioners filed a typed set of papers and additional typed set of papers with documents and relied upon the following citations: