JUDGEMENT
-
(1.) HEARD learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondent no.1 and Sri
Sanjai Singh, learned counsel for the Bank-respondent
nos.2 and 3.
By means of this petition the petitioner has prayed for
quashing the notice dated 30.8.2012 issued by the
Bank in exercise of power under under Section 13(4) of
the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial
Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002
(in short the Act) for taking possession of the
mortgaged assets.
(2.) PETITIONER 's case in the writ petition is that the petitioner had taken a loan of Rs. 30,00,000/- in the
year 2009 for purchase of a truck. When the petitioner
had committed default the bank has initiated
proceedings under Section 13(2) of the said Act dated
29.2.2012 for the recovery of an amount of Rs. 27,10,990/- plus interest as on 29th February, 2012. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner accepts the entire liability and is ready to
deposit the entire amount along with up to date interest
if she is given some reasonable time to make the entire
payment.
Learned counsel for the Bank submitted that the Bank is interested in realizing its outstanding amount against
the petitioner and in case the petitioner makes the
payment within the time granted by the Court, the Bank
may not proceed against the petitioner. However, liberty
be given to the Bank to proceed further against the
petitioner under the Act, 2002 in event any default is
committed by the petitioner.
The Apex Court in United Bank of India Vs. Satyavati
Tandon & Ors, 2010 (8) SCC 110 has held that the High
Court shall not ordinarily entertain the writ proceedings
arising out of the Act, 2002 and the aggrieved parties
shall be relegated to avail the remedy as provided
under Section 17 of the Act, 2002. There cannot be any
dispute to the law as laid down by the Apex Court in the
aforesaid case. However, in the present case the
petitioner accepts the liability and does not challenge
the action of the Bank on merits and has come in the
writ petition with a limited prayer to grant sometime to
deposit the entire amount.
(3.) CONSIDERING the facts of the present case, we are of the view that ends of justice be served in giving one
opportunity to the petitioner to clear of the entire
outstanding amount.
The writ petition is disposed of with the following
directions:-
1. The petitioner shall deposit the entire outstanding amount along with up to date interest in four equal quarterly installment. 2. First installment shall be paid on or before 31st January 2013. On deposit of first instalment the Bank shall provide upto date statement of account to the petitioner after adjusting the amount already paid by her and thereafter the petitioner shall deposit the subsequent instalment within every three months. The petitioner shall deposit the entire amount with the respondent bank, and no recovery charges shall be realized from her. 3. Subject to payment as directed above, no further action under the Act, 2002, shall be taken against the petitioner. In event the petitioner fails to make the payment as directed above, it shall be open for the respondents to proceed against the petitioner further under the Act,2002. ;
Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.