JUDGEMENT
-
(1.)The instant petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution is preferred by the borrower (partnership firm) petitioner no.1 and its
partner petitioner no.2 along with petitioner no.3, who happens to be
a guarantor in respect of Cash Credit Limit of Rs.20.00 Lakhs per annum
for which hypothecation agreement was entered into by the
petitioner firm on 23/12/2014 for operating expenses of Paper
Trading business.
(2.)The property of the respondent no.3-guarantor was hypothecated to secure the said credit.
(3.)Due to default in repayment of interest the respondent Bank declared the cash credit account of petitioner as Non Performing
Asset ("NPA" for brevity). Consequentially on 16/1/2019 vide
Annexure P/4 notice u/S 13 (2) of the Securitisation and
Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security
Interest Act, 2002 (for brevity "SARFAESI Act") was issued
requiring the petitioner to discharge the liability to the secured
creditor i.e. respondent Bank within 10 days, failing which
respondent Bank shall be free to take recourse of clause (4) of
sec. 13 of SARFAESI Act. The petitioner submitted his reply vide
Annexure P/9 denying the default and also the rate of interest
charged. However, it is contended by the petitioner that without
considering the objections raised by the petitioner the respondent
Bank filed an application u/S. 14 before District Magistrate Gwalior
requesting for taking possession of the secured assets. In response
to the notice issued by the District Magistrate Gwalior the petitioner
submitted his objection vide Annexure P/12 questioning the very
validity of the decision of the respondent-Bank to declare the
account as NPA and also raising certain disputed questions of fact in
regard to the quantum and justification of interest rate. It is further
contention of the petitioner that an application for settlement was
also filed expressing willingness to settle the matter vide Annexure
P/3. It is however submitted that Bank did not respond to the offer.
Thereafter it is submitted that due to first wave of Covid-19
pandemic the matter was in a limbo which culminated into issuance
of impugned order u/S.14 of SARFAESI Act dtd. 26/11/2020 vide
Annexure P/1 directing Tahsildar Dabra to ensure handing over of
possession of the secured assets to the Bank. It is lastly submitted
that the objection to the aforesaid impugned order preferred by the
petitioner was also wrongly rejected on 31/8/2021 vide Annexure
P/16.
Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.