Tapen Sen, J. - (1.) IN this Writ Petition filed by the UCO Bank, prayer, inter alia, is not to give effect to the sale of the property to the second highest bidder in terms of the impugned letters dated 4.8.2010 (Annexure P -13) and 19.8.2010 (Annexure P -15). The Petitioner has further prayed for quashing of the said letters dated 4.8.2010 and 19.8.2010. They have also made a prayer that a writ of mandamus be issued directing the joint sale of the entire property comprising of 6.07 acres of land (i.e. 3.46 Acres of the mortgaged property PLUS 2.59 Acres held by the Petitioners by way of equitable mortgage).
(2.) THE facts of this case, as would appear from the pleadings, is that in the year 1986, the West Bengal State Financial Corporation (Respondent no. 1) had provided financial assistance to the Respondent No. 2 (Biswamata Cold Storage (P) Ltd.) by granting a loan of Rs. 60 lacs. In order to take the loan, the Managing Director of the said Respondent no. 2 deposited the Title Deeds in respect of the land measuring 3.46 acres (more or less) situated in Mouza Raghunathgarh, J.L. No. 87, R.S. No. 3729, Touzi No. 19, P.S. & S.R.O. Chandrakona, Dist. Paschim Medinipore. The said property consisted of building, cold storage with Chambers standing thereon belonging to the Respondent no. 2. These Title Deeds were deposited on 8.10.1986 by the Respondent no. 2 with the intention of creating security on the said property by way of first charge. Thereafter, on or about 29.3.2008, the Petitioner Bank sanctioned credit facilities to the Respondent no. 2 to the extent of Rs. 727.55 lacs for financing its cold storage unit. Credit facilities were secured by hypothecation of the Plant, Machinery, Equipment, Stocks of potatoes as also Book Debts of the Respondent no. 2 by way of first charge in favour of the Petitioner Bank.
(3.) HAVING availed the credit facilities to the tune of Rs. 727.55 lacs from the Petitioner, the Respondent no. 2 neglected and failed to make repayment and consequently, in May 2002, the Petitioner was compelled to demand repayment of the loan. Thereafter, on 30.5.2009, the Petitioner issued a Notice under Section 13(2) of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act 2002. In spite of the said Demand, the Respondent No. 2, as well as its three Guarantors namely, Shyamal Dandapat, Panchugopal Dandapat and Babita Dandapat (who had guaranteed repayment of the dues) also neglected and failed to pay the same to the Petitioner Bank.;