Telangana High Court
WP/41274/2014 of M/s.Sree Siddi Vinayaka Minerals Vs The Branch Manager, on 31 December 2014
SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU AND THE HON’BLE MRS JUSTICE ANIS WRIT PETITION No.41274 OF 2014 ORDER:- (per Hon’ble Sri Justice K.C.Bhanu) This writ petition is filed seeking to issue a Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondent Bank in issuing notice, dated 12.12.2014, under
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANUANDTHE HON’BLE MRS JUSTICE ANIS
WRIT PETITION No.41274 OF 2014
ORDER:- (per Hon’ble Sri Justice K.C.Bhanu)
This writ petition is filed seeking to issue a Writ of Mandamusdeclaring the action of the respondent Bank in issuing notice, dated12.12.2014, under Section 13(4) of the Securitization andReconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of SecurityInterest Act, 2002 (for short, “the SARFAESI Act”) as illegal andarbitrary, and consequently, to set aside the same.
2. Petitioner obtained cash credit of Rs.75,00,000/- and term loan ofRs.1,00,00,000/- from the respondent Bank for business purpose. Itpaid some instalments and later, committed default in repayment of theentire loan amount. The loan was declared as Non-performing Asset(N.P.A.). Initially, a notice under Section 13(2) of the SARFAESI Actwas issued by the respondent Bank on 07.10.2014 and later,possession notice under Section 13(4) of the SARFAESI Act wasissued on 12.12.2014 informing that the respondent Bank wasintending to take possession of the mortgaged assets on 09.01.2015.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner stated that the petitioner isready to pay the entire amount due to the respondent Bank if sixweeks’ time is granted to it.
4. On the other hand, learned Standing Counsel appearing for therespondent Bank opposed the same on the ground that earlier, thepetitioner committed default in payment of the instalments and prays todismiss the writ petition.
5. The respondent Bank is interested only to recover the entireamount due. As the petitioner came forward to discharge the entire outstanding amount to the bank, reasonable time can be granted toenable the petitioner to pay the entire amount due to the Bank. Therefore, we direct the petitioner to pay 50% of the outstanding loanamount to the Bank within a period of six (6) weeks from the date ofreceipt of a copy of this order and the remaining 50% of the loanamount within a period of six (6) weeks thereafter. If anyone of theabove conditions is not fulfilled by the petitioner, the respondent Bankis at liberty to proceed further for realisation of the amount due to theBank in accordance with the provisions under the SARFAESI Act andtake possession of the secured asset and sell the same. Registry isdirected not to entertain any application seeking “Extension of Time” or“For being mentioned” in this regard.
6. With the above direction, the Writ Petition is disposed of. Thereshall be no order as to costs. Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pendingin this Writ Petition shall stand closed.
______________________
JUSTICE K.C.BHANU
_______________
JUSTICE ANIS
Date: 31.12.2014
AMD
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU
AND
THE HON’BLE MRS JUSTICE ANIS
WRIT PETITION No.41274 OF 2014
DATE: 31.12.2014
AMD