2023 Supreme(Online)(MAD) 15351
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS RESERVED ON : 29.08.2023 PRONOUNCED ON : 05.09.2023 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM W.P.No.15014 of 2022 &
W.M.P.No.14231 of 2022 Indian Overseas Bank, Asset Recovery Management Branch, No.11/952, Cross Cut Road, Coimbatore-641 012.
Represented by its Chief Manager. ...Petitioner Vs.
1. The Assistant Commissioner of Central Excise and service Tax, Salem I Division, No. 21 Theerthamali Arcade, Veerapandiyar Nagar, Salem-636 004.
2. M/s. Hi-Tech Minerals Industries Covai Pvt. Ltd. (In Liquidation), Represented by its Official Liquidator High Court, Corporate Bhawan (UTI building)
2nd Floor, No.24 Rajaji Salai, Chennai-01.
3. The Sub Registrar, Omalur, Salem District, Tamil Nadu. ..Respondents Prayer : Writ Petition filed Under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus, to direct the First respondent to remove the attachment effected on 03.12.2014 as mentioned in EC with the office of the 3rd respondent in respect of secured property belonging to the 2nd respondent so as to enable the petitioner bank to register the sale certificate / sale deed in favour of auction purchaser / third party(s) in accordance with law.
For Petitioner : Mr.M.L.Ganesh For Respondens (R1) : Mr.Umesh Rao .K, Senior Standing Counsel (R2) : Mr.B.Dhan Raj (R3) : Mr.D.Ravichander, Special Govt.Pleader
ORDER
The lis on hand has been instituted to direct the 1st respondent to remove the attachment effected on 03.12.2014, as mentioned in the Encumbrance Certificate, with the Office of the 3rd respondent, in respect of secured property belonging to the 2nd respondent, so as to enable the petitioner Bank to register the sale certificate / sale deed in favour of auction purchaser / third party(s) in accordance with law.
Facts of the Case:
2.The petitioner is the Indian Overseas Bank, Asset Recovery Management Branch. The 2nd respondent had purchased the land and building together with plant, machineries, accessories etc., belonging to M/s.Tamil Nadu Sponge Limited, pursuant to the sealed tender invited by DRT, Coimbatore in TA.No.995/2002, which was filed by ICICI Bank Limited, IDBI and IFCI. The DRT, Coimbatore had received 16 tenders and out of which the 2nd respondent-Company was declared as highest bidder and on remittance of entire sale price, the DRT, Coimbatore issued sale certificate on 30.09.2003 in favour of the 2nd respondent.
3. The sale certificate was duly registered as Document No.566/2004 SRO, Omalur in favour of the 2nd respondent, in respect of the properties morefully described in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition.
4. The 2nd respondent-Company had availed various credit facilities from the petitioner-Bank from time to time in order to run its business operations on the aforesaid property and the last credit facilities, namely, cash credit facility, working capital demand loan, term loan (9Nos) LG, LC and A & E were extended by the petitioner-Bank for Rs.241.52 Crores and in order to secure the aforesaid credit facilities, the 2nd respondent had created primary security on hypothecation of stocks, stocks in trade, book debts, receivables, consumables and collateral security for the aforesaid property. Besides, the aforesaid property belonging to the 2nd respondent and guarantors also offered some immovable properties to secure the immovable properties. The 2nd respondent had defaulted in repaying the loan amount, and the loan accounts were slipped into NPA category on 31.12.2023 in terms of Reserve Bank of India (RBI) guidelines. The 2nd respondent-Company had become non-functional ever since from the year 2014 onwards and virtually defunct due to stoppage of business operations. The Guarantors also had failed and neglected to repay the outstanding loan amount. The petitioner-Bank had invoked SARFAESI actions and thus, caused demand notice under Section 13(2) of Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Securities Interest (SARFAESI) Act, 2002, on 21.02.2014 to the 2nd respondent and the possession had been taken by the petitioner-Bank. The Bank continued its actions under the SARFAESI to recover the huge outstanding loan amount of Rs.216,63,91,070.59/- as on 21.02.2014. The petitioner-Bank has so far caused more than 10 notices to auction the secured property belonging to the 2nd respondent but could not be sold for want of bidders mainly due to the attachment effected by the 1st respondent / Assistant Commissioner of Central Excise and Service Tax towards its dues.
5. The petitioner-Bank had so far sold the secured properties belonging to the guarantors and recovered only a sum of Rs.51,79,77,500/- as against the staggering outstanding amount of Rs.216,63,91,070.59 as on
21.02.2014.
6. The petitioner-Bank mainly contended that they are struggling to auction the secured properties beacuae of the attachment made by the 1st respondent. They are unable to register the sale deed and necessary entries are not made in the Encumbrance Certificate. Thus, the 3rd party purchasers are unable to deal with the properties, which they purchased through public auction conducted by the Bank. The respondent is not having any priority over the debts of the creditor. The petitioner-Bank admittedly is the secured creditor and hold first charge over the debts. More so, the dues to the Ba