Back
2019 Supreme(AP) 193
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
M. SEETHARAMA MURTI, J. UMA DEVI, JJ.
Maruthi Minerals (P) Ltd. - Appellant
Versus
Authorized Officer/Chief Manager, Bank of India - Respondent
WP No. 4235 of 2019
Decided On : 13-08-2019
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : P.K.K. Amarendra Kumar
For the Respondent: V. Dyumani
Headnote:
Securitisation & Reconstruction of Financial Assets & Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 – Section 13(2) - Seeking verbatim - This writ petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, is filed seeking verbatim to issue order, direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus declare, the action of the respondents in not considering the application submitted by the petitioner as illegal, arbitrary and contrary to the provisions of SARFAESI Act and consequently direct the respondent to consider the application filed by the petitioner and to pass such other order or orders as this Honble Court may deems fit just and proper in the circumstances of the case – Held, The petitioner opted for OTS. OTS was sanctioned and payment schedule was given. The petitioner failed to make payments, as per the schedule under OTS. Eventually, for non-payment of the amount due as per the schedule under the OTS, the OTS stood revoked. The petitioner earlier filed WP No. 2877 of 2018 and the said writ petition was dismissed as withdrawn. In the said order, this Court observed that the order in the writ petition shall not preclude the Bank from initiating/pursuing the proceedings under the SARFAESI Act, if necessary. Once OTS facility was sanctioned and the same was revoked on account of the petitioners failure to abide by the payment schedule, the respondent Bank is entitled to initiate/pursue the proceedings under the SARFAESI Act; and, a defaulter like the writ petitioner is not entitled to stall such proceedings, which the Bank is entitled to initiate and pursue as per law. It is well settled that a Court of equity will not assist a person in extricating himself from the circumstances that he has created and that equity will not grant relief from a self-created hardship. Hence, we hold that no valid & sufficient grounds are made out for granting any relief exercising equity jurisdiction - Petition is dismissed
JUDGMENT :
M. SEETHARAMA MURTI, J.
1. This writ petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, is filed seeking verbatim the following relief:
'to issue order, direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus declare, the action of the respondents in not considering the application submitted by the petitioner on 14.11.2018 as illegal, arbitrary and contrary to the provisions of SARFAESI Act and consequently direct the respondent to consider the application filed by the petitioner on 14.11.2018 and to pass such other order or orders as this Hon'ble Court may deems fit just and proper in the circumstances of the case.'
2. We have heard the submissions of Sri P.R.K. Amarendra Kumar, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner; and, of Ms. V. Dyumani, learned Counsel appearing for the respondent. We have perused the material record.
3. The case of the petitioner, which requires a relevant mention, in brief, is this:
'In the year 2013, the petitioner approached the respondent Bank for financial assistance for development of its business and pledged & mortgaged its properties with the Bank on the Bank offering, in the year 2014, term loan, Current Account, Cash Credit Account in a sum of Rs. 10 crores. The petitioner is regular in paying the instalments/EMIs. However, the respondent Bank declared the asset as a Non-Performing Asset, on 18.8.2015. A demand notice, dated 19.8.2015, was issued under Section 13(2) of the Securitisation & Reconstruction of Financial Assets & Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 ('SARFAESI Act', for brevity) calling upon the petitioner to discharge the liability in full by paying to the Bank a sum of Rs. 10,39,12,850/- with interest within 60 days from the date of notice and intimating that on failure to do so, the Bank will proceed against the secured assets mentioned in the said notice. The petitioner paid an amount of Rs. 5,14,81,455/-. The balance amount payable was Rs. 5,60,00,000/-. Therefore, the petitioner made an application, dated 29.9.2018, to the Bank for One Time Settlement (OTS). The said application was accepted by the Bank and a repayment schedule under OTS scheme was fixed, vide letter, dated 19.10.2018, of the Bank. As per the said schedule, the petitioner paid Rs. 30,00,000/-, on 29.9.2018. Further, the petitioner paid Rs. 1,12,00,000/- including Rs. 43,00,000/- by 11.11.2018. The balance amount of Rs. 4,48,00,000/- was payable on or before 12.1.2019. Beyond that period, interest is chargeable at the specified rate. Due to financial crisis, the petitioner could not pay the amounts, as per the schedule fixed by the Bank. Hence, it made an application, dated 14.11.2018, for extension of time to pay the amount as per the OTS scheme. By a letter, dated 18.3.2019, the petitioner was informed that time granted for repayment of loan amount under OTS scheme expires on completion of 180 days, from 29.9.2018, and that accordingly, time expired on 28.3.2018. Thus, the respondent Bank did not extend the time for payment of the balance amount under OTS scheme, though the Bank has got power to extend the time. If the Bank proceeds to take steps as per the provisions of the SARFAESI Act without extending the time, the petitioner suffers serious loss and hence, the writ petition is filed. The Bank ought to have considered the application submitted by the petitioner, on 14.11.2018, wherein, the petitioner sought extension of time, while stating that the petitioner is seriously committed to abide by the OTS scheme orders.'
4. Per contra, the case of the respondent Bank is this:
'The request in the letter, dated 14.11.2018, which the petitioner is seeking the Bank to consider, is not legal. The request is made to grant 30 days time for payment of second instalment of OTS in a sum of Rs. 69 lakhs. By letter, dated 19.10.2018, the Bank approved the OTS scheme for Rs. 5,60,00,000/-. The repayment schedule and the scheme is intimated to the petitioner. If only the OTS amount is paid
