Provision Of SC/ST Act Relating To Wrongful Dispossession Can't Be Invoked To Restrain Bank From Enforcing Mortgage Rights: Delhi High Court
The Court stayed proceedings initiated by the National Commission for Scheduled Tribes against Axis Bank and its officials.
Justice Sachin Datta, Delhi High Court
The Delhi High Court has held that the provisions of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (SC/ST Act) relating to wrongful occupation or dispossession of land cannot be used to prevent a bank from enforcing its lawful mortgage or security rights.
The Court stayed proceedings initiated by the National Commission for Scheduled Tribes (NCST) against Axis Bank, its Managing Director (MD), and Chief Executive Officer (CEO).
A Bench of Justice Sachin Datta, while passing the order, made it clear that the SC/ST Act could not be invoked to obstruct the exercise of a bank’s mortgage rights under the law. It stated, “Prima facie, in the context of the facts of the present case, Sections 3(1)(f) and (g) of the Atrocities Act are not attracted inasmuch the same cannot be invoked to preclude/ prevent the exercise of mortgage right/security interest of the petitioner.”
Brief Facts:
The proceedings before the NCST arose from a complaint filed by an individual alleging that Axis Bank had violated Sections 3(1)(f) and 3(1)(g) of the SC/ST Act.
The dispute originated from a 2013 credit facility of approximately ₹16.69 crore granted by Axis Bank to Sundev Appliances Ltd. The loan was secured through a mortgage on a property located in Vasai, Maharashtra. When the borrower defaulted, the loan account was declared a Non-Performing Asset (NPA) in 2017, prompting the bank to invoke its recovery rights under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (SARFAESI Act).
Subsequently, a civil dispute arose regarding the ownership of the mortgaged property. One of the parties involved in that dispute approached the National Commission for Scheduled Tribes, alleging that Axis Bank’s actions amounted to a violation of the SC/ST Act. Acting on the representation, the Commission directed the MD and CEO of Axis Bank to appear in person before it.
However, the High Court found that the NCST lacked jurisdiction to entertain the matter and to summon the bank’s top executives. The Court observed that there was no recorded justification for compelling the personal appearance of the MD and CEO.
Finding:
The Court said, “Also, the proceedings pending before respondent no.1 [National Commission for Scheduled Tribes], particularly, the summons issued therein which requires the MD & CEO of the petitioner [Axis Bank] to appear before the respondent no.1, are without jurisdiction. No rationale has been recorded for requiring senior officials of the petitioner to appear personally before the respondent no.1.”
The High Court thus stayed the proceedings before the Commission, noting that its intervention was prima facie unwarranted. The matter has been listed for further hearing on February 5, 2026.
Cause Title: Axis Bank Limited v. National Commission for Scheduled Tribes & Ors.
Appearance:
Petitioner: Senior Advocate Satvik Varma, along with advocates Manmeet Singh, Alok Shanker, Anugrah Robin Frey, Shantanu Parmar, Ajay Raj, and Balram.