J.C. Verma, J. - (1.) The petitioner, a private limited company with its registered office at Sawai Madhopur, on being encouraged to promote the hotel industry in Sawai Madhopur had applied for grant of loan for construction of an hotel at Sawai Madhopur. They were required to submit the report along with her application fee of Rs.3,900/- which they complied with. On submitting the application and going through all the formalities, the petitioner was sanctioned a loan of Rs.38,00,000/- vide Annexure-1. The petitioner had to pay another amount of Rs.19,000/- for processing as processing fee, /service charges and then necessary documents were executed. An equitable mortgage was also executed. The loan was sanctioned or 22.2.1988. The first instalment of As. 1,13,000/- was given in December, 1988. The petitioner started construction. It is averred by the respondents that the loan was to be released on receiving the progress of construction. All of a sudden the disbursement of loan was stopped without passing any order. In the discussions held in between the petitioner and the respondents, the company was asked to remove Shri Pradeep Baswatia from the Director ship and in response to such a discussion said Shri Baswatia had to resign as it was the grievance of the respondent that Shri Baswatia was involved in some criminal case on the complaint having been filed by some other firm in regard to his some business transaction. The process of documentation started once again on induction of new Director.
(2.) The second instalment of Rs.40,000/- was disbursed on 29.3.1990 which according to the petitioner was a very meagre amount for construction of hotel involving more than 20 rooms. The petitioner even informed the RFC of the progress. The petitioner was asked to send the progress report for further disbursement of loan. A valuer was sent. Third instalment was issued on 9.2.1993 amounting to Rs.93,515/-. As a matter of fact the RFC had been adjusting the part of instalments towards interest as well. The 4th instalment was disbursed of Rs.90,000/- whereas 5th and 6th instalments were disbursed on 12.12.1993 for an amount of Rs.1,12,000/- and Rs.44,900/-. The result of not disbursing the instalments in time or delayed instalments was perhaps because of certain ulterior motives. Money was being demanded, as alleged by certain officers of the RFC. A complaint to CBI was made by the company. An FIR No. 30/93 was registered against Shri Roodmal Aswal, the then Branch Manager, RFC, Sawai Madhopur and said Branch Manager was caught red handed for taking bribe from the petitioner company on 23.11.1993 and ever since the petitioner started feeling the pinch of involving the Branch Manager in the bribe case which matter is being investigated by the CBI against RFC. Approaches made by the petitioner to the Finance Minister and the Deputy Chief Minister brought no result. Instead of looking into the matter and releasing the balance of the amount, the RFC respondent issued a notice dated 23.7.1996 for repayment of the loan amount of Rs.15,58,421/- along with interest at the rate of 19.75% and 23% with threat that if the amount is not cleared action would be taken under Section 29 of the Act. The notice is attached as Annexure-24.
(3.) It is stated by the petitioner that as a matter of fact the RFC had bye-passed the purpose for which the RFC has been constituted, to promote the industrialisation and instead of helping the petitioner, the RFC had betrayed the petitioner company. It is stated that instead of Rs.30 Lacs of loan, an amount of Rs.6,91,000/- had been disbursed from the period from 1989 to 1992 and out of the above said amount the RFC had already deducted an amount of Rs.1,14,715/- towards interest and, therefore. a total amount of Rs.5,76,285/- had been disbursed. It is stated that the petitioner had invested more than Rs.20 lacs and have constructed 15 rooms with attached Lat-bath, Dinning Hall, Bar room, Restaurant, Kitchen upto roof level. The construction had to be stopped because of the omission of the RFC. Perforce the petitioner has filed the present writ petition stating; (1) that the RFC had created such a situation that the company had to lodge an FIR with the CBI and the Branch Manager Sawai Madhopur was arrested red handed for taking bribe and because of this reason the RFC is now enemical to the petitioner; (2) that because of the reason that one of the Director was involved in some private complaint in regard to certain other business transaction, the RFC had made an issue to remove the Director and to induct a new Director which had to be agreed by the company at the insistence of the RFC; (3) that the RFC had been negligent in disbursing the loan and have caused such an inordinate delay that the petitioner had to suffer an irreparable loss in the construction and cost of construction.;