https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=88420 HC ruled that the possession of immovable and movable assets was taken contrary to legal mandates under Section 14(1-A) of SARFAESI Act. The Additional District Magistrate improperly delegated possession authority, violating constitutional rights under Article 300A. The Additional Commissioner of Police was not authorized to further delegate possession powers, and the officers who took possession were not legally empowered. The court allowed the writ petition, directing the respondent to retake possession strictly in compliance with statutory provisions, ensuring proper notice to guarantors and adherence to procedural requirements. The judgment emphasizes the importance of following legal protocols in asset seizure proceedings. en-us Fri, 16 May 2025 08:40:38 +0530 Fri, 16 May 2025 08:40:41 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=88420 HC ruled that the possession of immovable and movable assets was taken contrary to legal mandates under Section 14(1-A) of SARFAESI Act. The Additional District Magistrate improperly delegated possession authority, violating constitutional rights under Article 300A. The Additional Commissioner of Police was not authorized to further delegate possession powers, and the officers who took possession were not legally empowered. The court allowed the writ petition, directing the respondent to retake possession strictly in compliance with statutory provisions, ensuring proper notice to guarantors and adherence to procedural requirements. The judgment emphasizes the importance of following legal protocols in asset seizure proceedings. Highlights Indian Laws Fri, 16 May 2025 08:40:38 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=88420