A Tenant relying on an un-registered rent agreement cannot challenged an order passed by Chief Judicial Magistrate u/s 14 of the SARFAESI Act, 2002 | There is no mandatory requirement to hear the Borrower or Guarantor at the time of passing of order u/s 14 – Shampa Basak Vs. Poonawalla Fincorp Ltd. – DRAT Kolkata

Hon’ble DRAT Kolkata held that if any of the tenants claim that he is entitled to possession of a secured for a term of more than a year, it has to be supported by the execution of a registered instrument. It was further held that in the absence of a registered instrument if the tenant relies on an unregistered instrument or an oral agreement accompanied by delivery of possession, the tenant is not entitled to possession of the secured asset for more than the period prescribed u/s 107 of the Transfer of Property Act. There is no mandatory requirement to hear the borrower or guarantor at the time of passing of order u/s 14 of the Act.

A Tenant relying on an un-registered rent agreement cannot challenged an order passed by Chief Judicial Magistrate u/s 14 of the SARFAESI Act, 2002 | There is no mandatory requirement to hear the Borrower or Guarantor at the time of passing of order u/s 14 – Shampa Basak Vs. Poonawalla Fincorp Ltd. – DRAT Kolkata Read Post »