DCB BANK LTD. Vs. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri Aniket Raj, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Dilip Kumar Kesharwani, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State-respondent.

(2.) This is a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India wherein the writ petitioner has made the following prayer:

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon the judgments of Bombay High Court in The Nashik Merchant Co-operative Bank (Multi State Scheduled Bank) Versus The District Collector, Jalna and others, decided on February 28, 2023, Bank of India Versus M/s Maharana Electricals Pvt. Ltd and others, decided on September 09, 2024 and Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd. and another Versus State of Maharashtra and others, decided on June 30, 2023, to buttress the argument that the Additional District Magistrate/District Magistrate has the power to execute/entertain a fresh application under Sec. 14 of Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 when the borrower in an illegal manner trespasses over the said property. He relies upon paragraph nos. 17, 18, 19 and 20 of the case of The Nashik Merchant Co-operative Bank (supra) which read as under: