Debenture trustee as secured creditor under SARFAESI can enforce security through demand, possession and Magistrate assistance.

A debenture trustee holding a mortgage and charge created for debentures subscribed by banks or a financial institution is treated as a secured creditor under the SARFAESI Act and may enforce the security as the holder of the security interest. The distinction drawn by the statute between banks and financial institutions and other debenture holders was held to have a rational nexus with speedy recovery of non-performing assets and did not offend Article 14. Notice under Section 13(2), possession under Section 13(4), and Magistrate assistance under Section 14 were described as valid enforcement steps within the statutory scheme. An alternate remedy under Section 17 existed, but the merits were examined and the writ challenge failed.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the debenture trustee was a secured creditor entitled to invoke the SARFAESI Act in respect of security created for debentures subscribed by banks and a financial institution; (ii) Whether the classification between debenture holders who are banks or financial institutions and other debenture holders offended Article 14 of the Constitution of India; (iii) Whether measures under Sections 13(2), 13(4) and 14 of the SARFAESI Act were validly taken by the debenture trustee; (iv) Whether the existence of an alternate remedy under Section 17 of the SARFAESI Act barred interference in writ jurisdiction.

Issue (i): Whether the debenture trustee was a secured creditor entitled to invoke the SARFAESI Act in respect of security created for debentures subscribed by banks and a financial institution.

Analysis: The debenture trust deed created a mortgage and charge over the petitioner's movable and immovable properties in favour of the trustee for repayment of the debentures, interest and other dues. The statutory definition of secured creditor was held to extend to a trustee holding securities on behalf of banks or financial institutions in whose favour security interest is created. Since the debentures were subscribed by banks and a financial institution, the petitioner was a borrower, the trust deed constituted the security agreement, and the trustee held the security for the beneficial interest of the debenture holders.

Conclusion: The debenture trustee was a secured creditor entitled to act under the SARFAESI Act.

Issue (ii): Whether the classification between debenture holders who are banks or financial institutions and other debenture holders offended Article 14 of the Constitution of India.

Analysis: The challenge lacked an adequate factual foundation in the writ petition, as there was no pleading that the trustee represented a mixed class of debenture holders. In any event, the distinction drawn by the statute between banks and financial institutions on one hand and other creditors on the other was held to bear a rational nexus to the object of speedy recovery of non-performing assets and protection of financial liquidity in the banking system.

Conclusion: The classification was valid and did not violate Article 14.

Issue (iii): Whether measures under Sections 13(2), 13(4) and 14 of the SARFAESI Act were validly taken by the debenture trustee.

Analysis: Once the account was treated as a non-performing asset and security interest stood created in favour of the trustee, notice under Section 13(2), possession action under Section 13(4), and recourse to the Magistrate under Section 14 were within the statutory scheme. The trustee alone, as the holder of security interest, could enforce the security and seek assistance for taking possession of the secured assets.

Conclusion: The action under Sections 13(2), 13(4) and 14 was lawful and within jurisdiction.

Issue (iv): Whether the existence of an alternate remedy under Section 17 of the SARFAESI Act barred interference in writ jurisdiction.

Analysis: Although an effective statutory remedy existed, the Court examined and rejected the petitioner's objections on merits and therefore found no reason to relegate the petitioner to that remedy at the stage of decision.

Conclusion: The writ petition was not entertained on the ground of alternate remedy because the merits were already adjudicated against the petitioner.

Final Conclusion: The impugned SARFAESI measures were upheld as conforming to the statutory framework, the constitutional challenge failed, and the writ petition was rejected.

Ratio Decidendi: A debenture trustee holding security created for debentures subscribed by banks or financial institutions is a secured creditor under the SARFAESI Act and may enforce that security through the statutory measures of demand, possession and Magistrate assistance.

---