- (1.) Initially, the writ petition was filed questioning notice dated 21.11.2013 issued under Section 13(2) of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Securities Interest Act, 2002 whereby the petitionerM/s Narayani Fuels Private Limited was called upon to pay Rs. 6,95,59,528.79 within 60 days from the date of notice. Subsequently, notice under Section 13(4) of SARFAESI Act, 2002 was issued on 04.02.2014 which was challenged by filing an application being I.A. No. 1693 of 2014. The amendment seeking permission to challenge notice dated 04.02.2014 was allowed vide order dated 26.03.2014.
(2.) The brief facts of the case shorn of unnecessary details may be stated thus: The petitioner is a private limited company registered under the Companies Act. It took a loan of Rs. 6.40 crores which included term loan of Rs. 2 crores and two cash credits amounting to Rs. 4.40 crores. The properties worth Rs. 15 crores and another Rs. 3 crores was pledged as mortgage to the respondent Bank for availing of the aforesaid loan. For enhancement/reschedulement of the loan, the petitioner submitted letter dated 22.12.2012 and the said proposal was duly recommended and forwarded to the Chief Manager, Punjab National Bank (PNB), Credit Administration, Ranchi vide letter dated 01.02.2013. Since the proposal remained pending, the petitioner vide letters dated 22.03.2013 and 08.05.2013 requested the respondent Bank for taking a decision on the proposal submitted on 22.12.2012 and again on 18.06.2013 a letter was written to the Chairman of the respondent Bank in this regard. On 19.06.2013, the respondent Bank served a notice upon the petitioner intimating irregularities in cash credit and term loan account and directed the petitioner to take immediate steps for payment of the amount due. A letter was thereafter written by the petitioner on 24.06.2012 to the Chief Manager, Punjab National Bank requesting the respondent Bank not to declare the loan account of the petitioner as nonperforming account (NPA) till the disposal of the representation made by the petitioner. A reminder dated 15.07.2013 was also sent to the Chairman, Punjab National Bank. While the matter was still pending, vide letter dated 12.09.2013 the respondent Bank informed the petitioner that one M/s NKD & Company has been appointed for conducting stock audit. Though vide letters dated 11.10.2013 and 15.10.2013, further request for enhancement/reschedulement of the account was made, a notice under Section 13(2) of the SARFAESI Act, 2002 was served upon the petitioner on 21.11.2013, calling upon the petitioner to deposit Rs. 6,95,59,528.79 within 60 days from the date of notice. Subsequently, notice under Section 13(4) of the SARFAESI Act, 2002 was issued on 04.02.2014.
(3.) A counteraffidavit has been filed by the respondent Bank raising a preliminary objection to the maintainability of the writ petition, stating that an equally efficacious speedy statutory remedy is available to the petitioner. It is stated that the Bank is maintaining "online credit proposal tracking system" which enables applicants to track their loan proposal by entering their User ID and Password received on mobile. As soon as the proposal is entered, a SMS is sent by the system to the applicant conveying the User ID and Password for online tracking of credit proposal. The unique ID generated for the petitioner's application was numbered 1515002013000001. In case of the petitioner the proposal was entertained in time and "Credit Risk Rating" was also done. The petitioner though vide letter dated 22.12.2012 requested for loan proposal for technological upgradation, the subsequent letter dated 22.03.2013 indicates that it needed fund for running its unit. In view of the irregularity in cash credit and TL account, action was taken by the concerned branch of the respondent Bank. Vide letter dated 09.06.2013, the borrower was informed that its account was running highly irregular with an amount Rs. 63.86 lacs. The borrower was directed to immediately deposit the total overdues amount for regularising its account so that its account does not turn into nonperforming assets (NPA). The creditorBank also requested the borrower to route its sale proceeds in the account and take immediate steps for regularisation of the account however, the petitioner did not take any step in the matter and consequently its account became NPA. The account of the petitioner has been categorised as NPA in terms of guidelines issued by the RBI. Though one M/s NKD & Company was assigned for stock audit of the petitionerCompany however, the petitionerCompany did not furnish information desired by the audit firm. In these facts, notices under Section 13(2) of the SARFAESI Act, 2002 and under Section 13(4) of the Act were issued.;