BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
S.S. SUNDAR, S. SRIMATHY, JJ.
Amuthavalli - Appellant
Versus
The Authorised Officer, City Union Bank Ltd., Thanjavur & Another - Respondent
W.P. (MD). No. 20483 of 2022 & W.M.P. (MD). No. 14826 of 2022
Decided On : 01-09-2022
Writ Petition - Certiorari - Auction Sale Notice - The court directed the respondent bank to defer the sale proceedings if the petitioner pays a specified sum before a certain date and allowed the petitioner to submit a representation for waiver of penal interest or restructuring the loan.
Fact of the Case:
The Writ Petition was filed to quash the tender cum auction sale notice issued by the respondent bank. The petitioner offered to reduce the liability by 25% if the sale proceedings were deferred.
Finding of the Court:
The court directed the respondent bank to defer the sale proceedings if the petitioner pays a specified sum before a certain date and allowed the petitioner to submit a representation for waiver of penal interest or restructuring the loan.
Issues: Impugned tender cum auction sale notice, petitioner's default and liability, deferment of sale proceedings, representation for waiver or restructuring.
Ratio Decidendi: The court balanced the interests of the petitioner and the respondent bank by allowing deferment of sale proceedings upon partial payment and providing an opportunity for the petitioner to seek relief under RBI guidelines.
Final Decision: The Writ Petition was disposed of with directions for the respondent bank to defer the sale proceedings upon payment by the petitioner and to consider the petitioner's representation for waiver or restructuring.
JUDGMENT
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Certiorari, to call for the records relating to the impugned tender cum auction sale notice, dated 02.08.2022 issued by the first respondent and to quash the same as illegal.)
S.S. Sundar, J.
1. This Writ Petition is filed for issuance of a Writ of Certioari to quash the impugned tender cum auction sale notice, dated 02.08.2022 issued by the first respondent.
2. Heard Mr.T.Veerakumar, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Mr.Pandivel, learned Counsel, who takes notice on behalf of the respondents. By consent of both parties, the present Writ Petition is taken up for final disposal at admission stage.
3. The learned Counsel for the petitioner states that the petitioner is prepared to reduce the liability by 25%, provided the respondent defer the further proceedings pursuant to the impugned sale notice.
4. The learned Counsel for the respondent bank states that the total outstanding amount as on date is around Rs.38,28,754/-. The learned Counsel for the respondent bank has serious objection to entertain this Writ Petition mainly on the ground that the Writ Petitioner has committed default and did not make payment pursuant to the demand notice or possession notice.
5. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is inclined to dispose of the Writ Petition with the following directions:
(1)The respondent bank shall defer the sale proceedings pursuant to the impugned notice, dated 02.08.2022, provided the petitioner pays a sum of Rs.9,60,000/- before the end of December 2022. Out of the sum of Rs.9,60,000/-, the petitioner is directed to pay a sum of Rs.1,60,000/- on or before 14.09.2022, a further sum of Rs.2,00,000/- on or before 15.10.2022, a further sum of Rs.2,00,000/- on or before 15.11.2022, and a further sum of Rs.2,00,000/- on or before 15.12.2022. The balance sum shall be paid by the petitioner on or before 31.12.2022.
(2)In case the petitioner fails to pay any one of the instalments, in the manner directed above, it is open to the respondent bank to proceed further in accordance with law ignoring this order.
(3)In case the petitioner deposits the amount as directed above, the petitioner is permitted to submit a representation to the respondent bank either for waiver of penal interest or One Time Settlement or for restructuring the loan and other concession, as may be permissible under the guidelines of Reserve Bank of India or the norms applicable to the respondent bank and the respondent bank shall pass appropriate orders in accordance with law.
(4)Till an order is passed on the representation of the petitioner and the same is communicated to the petitioner, the respondent bank shall not initiate any coercive action against the petitioner.
6. With the above directions, this Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
AI
The court has the discretion to provide directions for deferment of sale proceedings and allow the petitioner to seek relief under RBI guidelines.
Invoking jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India in the circumstances of a pending SARFAESI Application before the Debts Recovery Tribunal would amount to an abuse of process of c....
The court found that it would not be proper to entertain the petition challenging the auction sale notice at this stage.
The court has the authority to provide directions to the respondent bank regarding the deferment of sale or action pursuant to the possession notice, and the petitioner can submit a representation fo....
The court may grant an extension of time for payment based on the petitioner's efforts and the value of the mortgaged properties.
The court's intervention due to the absence of a Judicial Member in the Debts Recovery Tribunal and the grant of interim protection to the petitioner based on specific payment conditions.
The court ruled that once the loan is cleared and the property returned, the writ petition is moot.
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.