MADURAI: The Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court recently imposed Rs 50,000 cost on Tamil Nadu Industrial Investment Corporation Limited (TIIC) for driving a man to court by not handing over the physical possession of a property which the corporation had sold to him through auction.
A bench of justices R Subramanian and L Victoria Gowri further directed the TIIC to move an application before the Kanniyakumari collector to get possession of the property from the debtor within 10 days, with further directions to the collector to dispose of the application within a month, so that the property could be handed over to the petitioner.
The order was passed on a petition filed by Jasper Raj this year. According to the order, TIIC had secured a property from a debtor and had sold the same to Raj in February 2021. Though a sale certificate was issued to Raj three months later, the property was still not handed over to him.
When Raj approached the district collector, he was informed that he would be able to get relief if the secured creditor (the TIIC) moved an application under SARFAESI Act, 2002. The collector had also written to TIIC asking it to take action to deliver the property to Raj, but the corporation had replied stating that it is not bound to hand over the possession as it had not given any assurance to the petitioner that it would hand over actual physical possession.
Hearing his plea, the bench criticised TIIC saying its actions were ‘highly irresponsible, negligent and careless’. “All that the petitioner asked for is to invoke the provision under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act, 2002 and seek possession through the district collector or the Chief Judicial Magistrate. In view of the refusal to hand over possession to the purchaser, we firmly believe that the corporation is in collusion with the debtor,” the judges observed and directed TIIC to pay Rs 50,000 to Raj for failing to fulfil its statutory obligations and making him approach the court.
‘Corpn, debtor nexus?’
Hearing the plea, the bench criticised TIIC saying its actions were ‘highly irresponsible, negligent and careless. “In view of the refusal to hand over possession, we firmly believe that the corporation is in collusion with the debtor,” it said