Patna High Court
ICICI Home Finance Company Ltd.versusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- A ABHISHEK REDDY
Holding
The Court held that the District Magistrate must act as a ministerial authority on a compliant Section 14 application and is directed to do so within eight weeks.
Summary
ICICI Home Finance Company filed a writ petition seeking a direction to the District Magistrate, Saran, to act on its requisition under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act for possession of secured assets. The Bank alleged that the Magistrate had not taken any action despite the application. Relying on the Supreme Court’s decision in Balkrishna Rama Tarle v. Phonix ARC (2023) which characterises the Magistrate’s role under Section 14 as a ministerial duty that must be performed without delay, the Patna High Court ordered the Magistrate to consider the Bank’s request within eight weeks. The Court also allowed the petitioner’s counsel to correct the respondent’s cause title and disposed of the writ petition without addressing the merits. The order directs the District Magistrate to act expeditiously, thereby concluding the proceedings.
Issues considered
- Whether the District Magistrate is statutorily bound to act on a valid application under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act without undue delay.
- Whether the High Court can issue a mandatory time‑bound direction to the District Magistrate to comply with the Section 14 application.
- Whether the writ petition is maintainable for seeking such a direction.
Legislation cited
Subjects
- SARFAESI Act
- Section 14
- secured creditor
- possession of secured assets
- District Magistrate
- ministerial duty
- writ petition
- banking
- debt recovery
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.18211 of 2025
======================================================
ICICI Home Finance Company Ltd. Having its Corporate Office at ICICI
Bank Tower, Bandra Kurla Complex, Mumbai- 400051, Maharashtra, and
Branch Office at 4th Floor, 401, Kanak Brajraj Complex, Dhakanpura, Kavi
Raman Path, Patna, Bihar- 800001. Through its Authorised Officer, Mr.
Pramod Kumar, Male, aged about 44 years, Son of Shri Shyam Bihari Ram, at
present posted as Territory Business Manager and Authorised Officer, Bihar
of ICICI Home Finance Company Ltd.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Finance Department,
Bihar, Patna.
2. The District Magistrate, Saran at Chhapra.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Navendu Kumar
For the Respondent/s : Mr.Government Pleader (05)
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A. ABHISHEK REDDY
ORAL ORDER
4 20-01-2026 Re: I.A. No. 01 of 2026.
For the reasons mentioned in the above Interlocutory
Application, the same is allowed.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner is permitted to
correct the cause title of the respondent No. 2 herein during the
course of the day.
3. Registry is directed to make necessary changes
accordingly.
4. Without going into the merits or demerits of the
case, the present writ petition is disposed of at the stage of
admission with the consent of both the counsels.
Patna High Court CWJC No.18211 of 2025(4) dt.20-01-2026
2/4
5. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioner submits that the petitioner-Bank has sent a requisition
to the District Magistrate, Saran at Chhapra under Section 14 of
the SARFAESI Act, 2002. However, the authority till date has
not taken any action on the same. Learned counsel submits that
it will suffice for the present if a direction is given to the District
Magistrate, Saran at Chhapra to consider the request made by
the Bank under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act and take a
suitable action as per the provisions of the SARFAESI Act.
Learned counsel has relied on a Judgement of the Hon’ble
Supreme Court in the case of Balkrishna Rama Tarle Dead
through legal representatives and Anr. Versus Phonix ARC
Private Limited and Ors. reported in (2023) 1 Supreme Court
Cases 662, whereby the Hon’ble Supreme Court has held as
under:-
“15. On a fair reading of Section 14 of
the SARFAESI Act, it appears that for taking
possession of the secured assets in terms of Section
14(1) of the SARFAESI Act, the secured creditor is
obliged to approach the District Magistrate/Chief
Metropolitan Magistrate by way of a written
application requesting for taking possession of the
secured assets and documents relating thereto and
for being forwarded to it (secured creditor) for
further action.
16. The statutory obligation enjoined
Patna High Court CWJC No.18211 of 2025(4) dt.20-01-2026
3/4
upon the CMM/DM is to immediately move into
action after receipt of a written application under
Section 14(1) of the SARFAESI Act from the secured
creditor for that purpose. As soon as such an
application is received, the CMM/DM is expected to
pass an order after verification of compliance of all
formalities by the secured creditor referred to in the
proviso in Section 14(1) of the SARFAESI Act and
after being satisfied in that regard, to take
possession of the secured assets and documents
relating thereto and to forward the same to the
secured creditor at the earliest opportunity. As
observed and held by this Court in NKGSB Coop.
Bank Ltd. v. Subir Chakravarty [NKGSB Coop.
Bank Ltd. v. Subir Chakravarty, (2022) 10 SCC
286 : (2023) 1 SCC (Cri) 157] , the aforesaid act is
a ministerial act. It cannot brook delay. Time is of
the essence and this is the spirit of the special
enactment.
18. Thus, the powers exercisable by
CMM/DM under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act
are ministerial steps and Section 14 does not involve
any adjudicatory process qua points raised by the
borrowers against the secured creditor taking
possession of the secured assets. In that view of the
matter once all the requirements under Section 14 of
the SARFAESI Act are complied with/satisfied by the
secured creditor, it is the duty cast upon the
CMM/DM to assist the secured creditor in obtaining
the possession as well as the documents related to
the secured assets even with the help of any officer
subordinate to him and/or with the help of an
advocate appointed as Advocate Commissioner. At
that stage, the CMM/DM is not required to
adjudicate the dispute between the borrower and the
Patna High Court CWJC No.18211 of 2025(4) dt.20-01-2026
4/4
secured creditor and/or between any other third
party and the secured creditor with respect to the
secured assets and the aggrieved party to be
relegated to raise objections in the proceedings
under Section 17 of the SARFAESI Act, before the
Debts Recovery Tribunal.
6. Having regard to the above made submissions and
the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the above
mentioned case, this Court deems it expedient to dispose of the
present CWJC by directing the Respondent No. 2, i.e., the
District Magistrate, Saran at Chhapra to act on the request made
by the petitioner-Bank. The present writ petition is accordingly
disposed of directing the Respondent No. 2, i.e., the District
Magistrate, Saran at Chhapra to consider the request made by
the Bank as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period
of eight weeks from the date of receipt of the copy of this order.
7. With the above directions, the present writ petition
stands disposed of.
(A. Abhishek Reddy , J)
Ayush/-
U
Checking your session…