IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT INDORE BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIVEK RUSIA &

HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE AMAR NATH (KESHARWANI)

th ON THE 5 OF JULY, 2022 WRIT PETITION No. 5864 of 2022 Between:-

SMT. MISHRI BAI W/O LATE SHRI NIRMAL KUMAR, AGED ABOUT 85 YEARS, OCCUPATION:

1.

HOME MAKER, R/O 599-A, MAHALAXMI NAGAR, INDORE (MADHYA PRADESH)

SMT. SUMAN MODI W/O SHRI ANIL MODI, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, OCCUPATION: HOME

2.

MAKER, R/O 599-A, MAHALAXMI NAGAR, INDORE (MADHYA PRADESH)

SHRI MAHAK MODI S/O SHRI ANIL MODI, AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS, OCCUPATION: BUSINESS, R/O

3.

599-A, MAHALAXMI NAGAR, INDORE (MADHYA PRADESH)

.....PETITIONERS (DEVAASHEESH DUBEY, LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE PETITIONERS)

AND SHUBH LAXMI MAHILA COOPERATIVE BANK

1. LTD. THROUGH AUTHORISED OFFICER 255, R.N.T. MARG, INDORE (MADHYA PRADESH)

ADDITIONAL DISTRICT MAGISTRATE INDORE

2. COLLECTORATE, MOTI TABELA INDORE (MADHYA PRADESH)

TEHSILDAR KANADIYA COLLECTORATE MOTI

3.

TABELA INDORE (MADHYA PRADESH)

4. M/S RAJ AGRO CORPORATION THR ITS PROPRIETOR SMT. NEHA PANDYA W/O SHRI ANKUR PANDYA, AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS, R/O 210, TIRUPATI BUSINESS CENTRE, 22/1, SOUTH TUKOGANJ, GEETA BHAWAN, INDORE (MADHYA PRADESH)

M/S ANKUR CORPORATION THR ITS PROPRIETOR SMT. PRAMILA PANDYA W/O SHRI RAJKUMAR PANDYA, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, 5.

R/O 210, TIRUPATI BUSINESS CENTRE, 22/1, SOUTH TUKOGANJ, GEETA BHAWAN, INDORE (MADHYA PRADESH)

.....RESPONDENTS (SHRI VALMIK SAKARGAYEN, LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE RESPONDENT NO.2 AND 3.

SHRI AASHAY DUBEY, LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE RESPONDENT [R-1])

This petition coming on for order this day, JUSTICE VIVEK RUSIA passed the following:

ORDER

Petitioners have filed the present petition being aggrieved by the letter dated 02.03.2022 (Annexure P/16) written by the Tehsildar, Knadiya, Indore/ respondent No.3 whereby petitioners and respondents No.4 and 5 were directed to hand over the physical possession of the ground floor of property situated at EB-250 (Old No.BB-1), Sector-B, Scheme No.94, Near Bombay Hospital, Indore (M.P.).

The facts of the case in short are as under:

[2] Respondents No.4 and 5 took financial assistance of Rs. 35,00,000/- each (two loans) from respondent No.1/Bank. The petitioners have stood as guarantors by mortgaging the property situated at EB-250 (Old No.BB-1), Sector-B, Scheme No.94, Near Bombay Hospital, Indore (M.P.) (hereinafter referred to as ''mortgaged property'') as a security against the said two loans. In the month of January 2018, the aforesaid two loan accounts were classified as None-Performing Assets (in short 'NPA') by the respondent No.1/Bank followed by the issuance of notice under Section 13(2) of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (hereinafter referred to as ' the SARFAESI Act). After receipt of notice under Section 13(4) of the SARFAESI Act, the petitioners approached respondent No.1/Bank showing a willingness to clear the outstanding dues of respondent No. 4 & 5 by way of the schedule prepared by the Bank. The respondent No.1/Bank did not agree with the proposal and decided to proceed under the SARFAESI Act by filing an application under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act before respondent No.2. Vide order dated 20.09.2019, the respondent No.2 has allowed the application filed by the respondent No.1/ Bank. In compliance with the aforesaid order, on 28.01.2020, the physical possession of the mortgaged property was taken by respondent No.3 and handed over to respondent No.1/Bank.

[3] According to the petitioner, on 01.02.2020, the possession of the mortgaged property was restored to the petitioners by respondent No.1/Bank, after accepting Rs.10,74,606/- and 10,26,600/- by way of the settlement in such eventuality, the order passed by District Magistrate has lost its consequence as the loan accounts stood regularized. It is further submitted by the learned counsel that the petitioners undertook to clear the remaining outstanding loan accounts within six months by handing over the post-dated cheques, mea