C. BRIGHT versus THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR & ORS.

C. BRIGHT versus THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR & ORS.

Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act, as amended, fixing time limits of 30 days (extendable to an aggregate of 60 days on reasons recorded) is a directory provision: the time limits are intended to ensure expeditious action and impose a duty on the Magistrate to attempt delivery of possession but failure to meet the time limits does not render the Magistrate functus officio or the remedy under Section 14 redundant.

Parties
Appellant: C. BRIGHT; Respondent: THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR & ORS.
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
05 November 2020
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court Order
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Section 14 Mandatory or Directory, Connotation of the Word 'shall'

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 25 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

C. BRIGHT

Appellant

THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR & ORS.

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court Order

  1. 1 Whether Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act (mandating District Magistrate to deliver possession within 30 days, extendable to 60 days on reasons recorded) is mandatory or directory
  2. 2 Whether the use of the word 'shall' in Section 14 makes the time limits strictly mandatory

Ratio Decidendi

Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act, as amended, fixing time limits of 30 days (extendable to an aggregate of 60 days on reasons recorded) is a directory provision: the time limits are intended to ensure expeditious action and impose a duty on the Magistrate to attempt delivery of possession but failure to meet the time limits does not render the Magistrate functus officio or the remedy under Section 14 redundant.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed