TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2016 (5) TMI 641
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....K. Arumugham (now deceased), V. Sathish Raj and R. Nandagopal, Partners of Yelagiri Dairy Farm, availed a term loan of Rs. 17 lakhs in the year 1989 to set up a dairy farm in Peddakallupalli Village, Vaniyambadi, on mortgaging the land admeasuring 6.10 acres in S. No.203/2,3,4,5 and 202/1A in the said village. The property was mortgaged through the attorney holder viz., N.K. Arumugham, who was appointed as the Power of Attorney vide a Power of Attorney deed executed on 26 October 1988, authorising him to mortgage or sell the property or construct building thereon. The said dairy farm discontinued to make repayment of the loan and as such, the petitioner bank filed a civil suit being O.S. No.437 of 1995 on the file of the Sub-Court, Thirupathur, for recovery of a sum of Rs. 31,00,238/-as outstanding as on that date, with interest and costs from the principal borrower, viz., Yelagiri Dairy Farm, its Partners and guarantors, including the first respondent, viz., Pappireddiar. On creation of the Debts Recovery Tribunal, the said suit was transferred from the file of the Sub-Court, Tirupattur, to the file of the Debts Recovery Tribunal-I, Chennai and re-numbered as T.A. No.1755 of 1997 ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... force with effect from 21 June 2002. The petitioner bank issued a fresh demand notice under Section 13(2) of the SARFAESI Act on 02 August 2011 demanding a sum of Rs. 85,41,662/- as stated to be outstanding on 31 July 2011. N.K. Arumugham, Partner of the firm-cum-Power of Attorney holder of the first respondent herein, objected to issuance of notice vide letter dated 27 September 2011, which was rejected by the petitioner bank on 03 October 2011. 2.4 It is the case of the petitioner bank that possession of the secured asset was taken over on 31 October 2011, which remained unchallenged. During pendency of the appeal, as aforestated, a notice for sale of the secured asset was issued on 02 February 2012, which was cancelled in view of some error in the schedule of property and again, vide sale notice dated 02 April 2012, the secured asset was put on sale. N.K.Arumugham assailed the said sale notices dated 02 February 2012 and 02 April 2012 in O.S. No.32 of 2012 and O.S. No.74 of 2012 on the stated ground of the secured asset being an agricultural land. One Ananda Kumar also preferred a civil suit being O.S. No.184 of 2011 on the file of the District Munsif Court, Ambur, in respec....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Tax, Gujarat 1993 Supp (4) SCC 707. 4 Referring to and relying on Clause 2(m) of the Statement of Objects and Reasons of the SARFAESI Act, he would submit that the rationale behind Section 31(i), ibid, is only to exempt security interest in the agricultural land and hence, the said provision cannot be given a meaning to contend that the nature of the land at the time of creation of security interest is relevant and not the nature of property at the time of enforcement of security interest. In this context, to fortify his contention that interpretation of a statute should be in a manner that it advances the object of the statute and makes the particular provision purposeful, the learned counsel has relied on the judgments of the Supreme Court in Union of India vs. Sankalchand Himatlal Sheth and another (1977) 4 SCC 193 and D. Saibaba vs. Bar Council of India and another (2003) 6 SCC 186. Further, in respect of the stand of the first respondent/mortgagor that the secured asset is exempted from the SAFAESI proceedings under the provisions of Section 31(i) of the SARFAESI Act, garnering support from the judgment of the Supreme Court in State of Gujarat vs. Essar Oil Ltd. and Other ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....iless. Though the bank had already obtained Recovery Certificate in the proceedings initiated under the RDDBFI Act, but, the said Recovery Certificate may not form the basis to classify the loan as a Non Performing Asset for the purpose of invoking the provisions of the SARFAESI Act. It is pertinent to point out that against the order passed by the Debts Recovery Tribunal in T.A. No.93 of 2007 under the RDDBFI Act, an appeal preferred before the Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal is still pending consideration. It is further contended that the bank ought not to have precipitated the entire proceedings by putting the property for sale, invoking the procedure under the SARFAESI Act, wherein, the agricultural land is exempted. 10. The learned counsel would further contend that even if the secured asset is sold to several other persons, it is not necessary to implead all successive purchasers as all the purchasers are represented through the auction purchaser, who is a party here and also filed the instant petition. Thus, the Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal has come to just, proper and legal conclusion, which deserves to be affirmed and the writ petitions be dismissed. 11. Heard ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... interest of any kind whatsoever upon property, created in favour of any secured creditor and includes any mortgage, charge, hypothecation, assignment other than those specified in section 31." 17. Section 13 of the SARFAESI Act provides for enforcement of security interest. Section 13(1) of the SARFAESI Act reads as under:- "13. Enforcement of security interest. -(1) Notwithstanding anything contained in section 69 or section 69-A of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882 (4 of 1882), any security interest created in favour of any secured creditor may be enforced, without the intervention of the Court or tribunal, by such creditor in accordance with the provisions of this Act." 18. Section 31(i) of the SARFAESI Act reads as under:- "31. Provisions of this Act not to apply in certain cases.--The provisions of this Act shall not apply to -- x x x x x x x x x x x x (i) any security interest created in agricultural land; " 19. Thus, the security interest, as defined, means right, title and interest of any kind whatsoever upon the property created in favour of any secured creditor, i.e., bank or financial institution, and includes any mortgage, ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....4. The word "agriculture" is defined under the Tamil Nadu Patta Pass Book Act, 1983, as under: "2. x x x x x x x x x (1) "agriculture" includes, -- (a) horticulture; (b) the raising of crops, grass or garden produce; (c) the use by a agriculturist of land held by him, or part thereof, for grazing; (d) the use of any land for the purpose of raising manure crops ; (e) dairy farming; (f) poultry farming; (g) livestock breeding; (h) growing of trees; and "agricultural" shall be construed accordingly;' 25. Under the Tamil Nadu Land Reforms (Fixation of Ceiling on Land) Act, 1961, the word "agriculture" is defined as under:- "3. Definitions.-In this Act, unless the context otherwise requires,- (1) "agriculture" includes - (a) horticulture; (b) the raising of crops, grass or garden produce; (c) the use by a agriculturist of land held by him, or part thereof, for grazing; (d) the use of any land for the purpose of raising manure crops ; (e) dairy farming; (f) poultry farming; (g) livestock breeding; ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....of the SARFAESI Act to construe the word in such a manner, wherein, the basic purpose of recovery of money may be compatible. The Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court of India, in the said mater, in the context of interpreting the provision of Article 222 of the Constitution of India, observed as under: "54. Now, it is undoubtedly true that where the language of an enactment is plain and clear upon its face and by itself susceptible to only one meaning, then ordinarily that meaning would have to be given by the Court. In such a case the task of interpretation can hardly be said to arise. But language at best is an imperfect medium of expression and a variety of significations may often lie in a word or expression. It has, therefore, been said that the words of a statute must be understood in the sense which the legislature has in view and their meaning must be found not so much in a strictly grammatical or etymological propriety of language, nor in its popular use, as in the subject or the occasion on which they are used and the object to be attained. It was said by Mr Justice Holmes in felicitous language in Town v. Eisner that "a word is not a crystal, transparent and....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... their literal meaning "produce an inconsistency, or an absurdity or inconvenience so great as to convince the Court that the intention could not have been to use them in their ordinary signification", the Court would be justified in "putting on them some other signification, which, though less proper, is one which the Court thinks the words will bear". Vide River Wear Commissioners v. Adamson. It is in the light of these principles of interpretation that I must proceed to consider what is the true meaning and effect of clause (1) of Article 222: whether it permits transfer of a Judge from one High Court to another, irrespective of his consent." 30. The aforestated ratio is a well settled principle of interpretation. However, we have to examine the provisions of the instant Act. As aforestated, the object of the Act is to ensure expeditious recovery by enforcement of security interest created in the property. However, the security interest created in agricultural land is exempt from the provisions of the SARFAESI Act. There is no ambiguity, incompatibility and incongruity to give any other meaning or to substitute the word by supplying the other word. 31. The decision relied ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....IRC where at AC p. 577 he also observed (All ER p. 664 I): 'This is not a new problem, though our standard of drafting is such that it rarely emerges.']" 34. Further, it is well settled that words should not be read into an Act, unless it is absolutely necessary to do so and it is wrong to proceed by substituting some other word for a word which has clear, unambiguous meaning, as has been held by the Supreme Court in Great Offshore Limited vs. Iranian Offshore Engineering and Construction Company (2008) 14 SCC 240. The relevant paragraphs of the said judgment read as under:- "53. x x x x x x Where the statute has gone to great lengths to define exactly what is meant by the term "in writing", we are precluded from adding another term to definition. Indeed, "it is contrary to all rules of construction to read words into an Act unless it is absolutely necessary to do so". [See Justice G.P. Singh's Principles of Statutory Interpretation, 11th Edn., 2008, at p. 62.63, citing Renula Bose v. Rai Manmatha Nath Bose, AIR PC, p. 110; Stock v. Frank Jones (Tipton) Ltd., All ER, p. 951; Assessing Authority-cum-Excise and Taxation Officer v. East India Cotton Mfg. Co. Lt....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he principle of res judicata will apply to bar the appeal. Section 11 CPC would bar the court from trying any suit or issue in which the matter "directly and substantially in issue" between the same parties or between the parties under whom they or any of them claim, litigating under the same title in a court competent to try such subsequent suit or suit in which such issue has been subsequently raised, has been "heard and finally decided by such court". In the present case, Bajranglal and Shyamsunder were defendants in Original Suit No. 118 of 1973. The suit was dismissed and the plaintiff Satyavati carried an appeal to the Division Bench. In the appeal, both Bajranglal and Shyamsunder were respondents. The Division Bench, reversed the Single Judge's judgment and decreed the suit by its judgment. As the respondents in the appeal before the Division Bench both Bajranglal and Shyamsunder were aggrieved by the decree against them. The present appellant Bajranglal filed SLP No. 8425 of 1993 on 27-5-1993, while Shyamsunder filed his appeal SLP No. 18492 of 1993 on 17-12-1993. 42. Leave was granted in Bajranglal's appeal on 4-10-1993 while leave was granted in Shyamsund....