IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA
VIVEK SINGH THAKUR, ROMESH VERMA, JJ.
H.P. State Co-operative Bank Ltd. through its Managing Director – Appellant
Versus
State of H.P. and Others – Respondents
CWP No. 3924 of 2019
Decided On : 08-12-2025
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. loan sanctions and repayment terms stipulated. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. sarfaesi proceedings quashed by drt. (Para 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11) |
| 3. arbitration awards remanded for fresh disposal. (Para 12 , 13) |
| 4. parties argue remand validity on procedure. (Para 14 , 15 , 16 , 31) |
| 5. borrowers admit liability, seek repeated delays. (Para 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 , 30) |
| 6. admissions obviate framing of issues. (Para 32 , 33 , 34 , 35 , 36 , 37 , 38 , 39) |
| 7. prolonged litigation shows delay tactics. (Para 40 , 41 , 42 , 43 , 44 , 45 , 46 , 47) |
| 8. ots offered but not complied with. (Para 48 , 49 , 50 , 51 , 52 , 53) |
| 9. remand erroneous absent factual disputes. (Para 54 , 55 , 56 , 57) |
| 10. remand quashed; expeditious merits decision. (Para 58 , 59 , 60 , 61) |
JUDGMENT :
ROMESH VERMA, J.
1. The present writ petition arises out of the order dated 12.07.2019, passed by the Additional Registrar (Administration) Co-operative Societies H.P., whereby, Appeal Nos. 329, 330 and 331 of 2016 have been disposed off by setting-aside the award passed by the Arbitrator (Bank) and case was sent back to him for fresh disposal of the dispute under Section 72 of the H.P. Co-operative Societies Act, 1968. It was ordered that Arbitrator shall decide the case within a period of four months from the date of the appearance of the parties.
2. The facts which arise in the case are that the present petitioner advanced working capital (CC) limit of Rs. 10.00 lakhs to M/S Bhagra Resorts Pvt. Ltd. through its Managing Director Smt. Prabha Bhagra on 16.02.2004. Further, on 28.06.2005, the private respondents availed term loan of Rs. 3.00 crores vide sanction letter dated 28.06.2005 for completion/ renovation of the Hotel/Motel under the scheme of the Bank. The said term loan of Rs.3.00 crores was sanctioned in favour of M/S Bhagra Resorts Pvt. Ltd., (respondent No.5). The present petitioner sanctioned the term loan of Rs. 3.00 crores on 28.06.2005 at the rate of 10.90% interest for a period of seven years including moratorium period of one year. The petitioner has placed on record the copy of the sanction of capital (CC) limit of Rs. 10.00 Lakhs as Annexure P-1 and sanction of term loan of Rs. 3.00 crores in favour of respondent No.5, as Annexure P-2.
3. It has been stipulated in the sanction letter, Annexure P-2 that the borrower shall repay the term loan within a maximum period of seven years including moratorium period of one year. It has further been stipulated in the sanction letter that during the moratorium period, the borrower shall repay the interest accrued on monthly basis with the stipulation that the loan shall be repaid in seventy two equated monthly installments (EMI) of Rs. 5.7 lakhs consisting of principal and interest. It has also been incorporated in the sanction letter that the borrower shall pay interest @ 10.90 % per annum on term loan. The interest shall be compounded on monthly rests, however, the rate of interest and periodicity of compounding of interest shall be subject to change from time to time without notice. The sanction letter stipulates that the Bank shall charge the penal interest @ 2% per annum over the normal interest.
4. The private respondents failed to repay the said loan amount, as a result of which, the loans/advances of the private respondents became non-performing assets in terms of the Reserve Bank of India Guidelines w.e.f. 30.09. 2006. Under such circumstances, the present petitioner issued notice under Section 13(2) of the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (hereinafter referred to as ‘SARFAESI Act’) to respondent No.5 for the payment of outstanding amount of Rs. 3,90,76,986.00/- crores.
5. Pursuant to the issuance of the notice, the District Magistrate, Shimla vide its order dated 14.01.2010 passed an order and the possession of the premises was taken on 03.05.2010, however, it is stated that private responden
Dr. Om Prakash Rawal vs. Justice Amrit Lal Bahri
Uttam Singh Duggal & Co. Ltd. vs. United Bank of India and others
Where borrowers admit loan liability in arbitration proceedings under Co-operative Societies Act, no issues need framing nor evidence recording; appellate remand solely on procedural grounds without ....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the limitation of the Arbitrator's powers, the calculation of arbitration costs, and the recovery fee under the rules, and the court's emphasis on ....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the jurisdictional limitations of the authority under the U.P. Co-operative Societies Act, 1965 and the availability of statutory alternative remed....
The failure to provide a signed copy of the arbitral award invalidates the presumption of service, thus impacting the limitation period for appeals.
Public sector banks must adhere to principles of fairness and non-arbitrariness in their dealings, as established under Article 14 of the Constitution.
Finality of a prior judgment bars new proceedings under the SARFAESI Act when based on the same invalid security, reinforcing jurisdictional limits of financial institutions.
Point of law: Loans by financial institutions are granted from public money generated at the taxpayer’s expense. Such loan does not become the property of the person taking the loan, but retains its ....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the limitation on the power of the Debts Recovery Tribunal to condone delay in filing an appeal under the SARFAESI Act, as clarified by the Supreme....
A writ petition is maintainable against a scheduled bank under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, as the bank is performing public functions and is governed by the provisions of the Banking Re....
The judgment establishes the court's power to grant extension of time for payment under the OTS, based on the RBI guidelines and the principles of equity and justice.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.