NASIM UDDIN CHOUDHURY Vs. STATE BANK OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. N. Nath, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. K.K. Nandi, learned counsel for the respondents.

(2.) It is not in dispute that the petitioner along with his father namely, Shams Uddin Choudhury and brother, namely, Gias Uddin Choudhury, jointly applied for a home loan of Rs.71,00,000.00 (Rupees Seventy One Lakh only) in the year 2022. Pursuant to the loan availed, an equitable mortgage was created in respect of the security assets which is more particularly described in paragraph 3 of the writ petition. Having availed the loan, the petitioner now contends that the equitable mortgage was created outside the notified area under Sec. 58 (f) of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882 and accordingly, creation of mortgages claimed to be illegal.

(3.) It is also not in dispute that the respondent No. 2 had issued a notice to the petitioner under Sec. 13 (2) of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 ('SARFAESI Act' for short) read with Rule 8 of the Security Interest (Enforcement) Rules, 2002 dtd. 12/11/2024, calling upon the petitioner to discharge and repay the outstanding loan amount with interest within 60 (Sixty) days from the date of receipt of notice. Thereafter, on 6/2/2025, constructive possession of the security assets was taken over by the respondent No. 2. Thereafter, the respondent No. 2 applied before the District Magistrate, Hailakandi on 28/3/2025 to provide assistance for taking over possession of the security assets. Accordingly, by an order dtd. 9/5/2025, the Additional District Magistrate, Hailakandi, entrusted the concerned Circle Officer, Algapur and Executive Magistrate, Hailakandi, to provide the necessary assistance to the respondent No. 2 for securing the possession of the security assets.