M/s M.J.K Naturals vs Union Bank Of India

C.S.Dias, J

The writ petition is filed to direct the respondents to permit the petitioners to conduct a private sale of the landed property and pay off the outstanding amount in instalments.

The petitioners’ case is that the first petitioner is a firm, which had availed two cash credit facilities from the second respondent – Bank – by creating an equitable mortgage. Due to the unprecedented floods and COVID-19 pandemic, the petitioners could not pay the instalments on time. The respondents have initiated proceedings against the secured asset under the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act (in short, ‘Act’). The petitioners are prepared to sell the collateral security and pay the sale amount towards loan instalments. Hence, the writ petition.

Heard; Sri.A.T Anilkumar, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and Sri.A.S.P Kurup, the learned counsel appearing for the respondents.

When the writ petition came up for consideration on 13.6.2023, this Court had stayed further coercive proceedings pursuant to Ext P4 subject to the condition that the petitioners deposit an amount of Rs.25,00,000/- within ten days from the date of order.

Sri.A.S.P Kurup, on instructions, submitted that despite the above order, the petitioners have not complied with the conditions in the above order. Therefore, there is no bonafides in the request made by the petitioners.

The Hon’ble Supreme Court in South Indian Bank Ltd vs. Naveen Mathew Philip (2023 LiveLaw (SC) 320), after adverting to a myriad of earlier judicial pronouncements rendered under the Act, has categorically declared that High Courts shall not, unless in extraordinary circumstances, interfere with proceedings initiated under the Act, in writ proceedings filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

Having considered the pleadings and materials on record, and taking note of the fact that the petitioners have failed to comply with the above conditional interim order passed by this Court, I am not inclined to exercise the discretionary powers of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and entertain the writ petition. Nonetheless, it would be up to the petitioners to work out their statutory remedies as provided under the Act.

Resultantly, the writ petition is dismissed, without prejudice to the right of the petitioners to work out their remedies, in accordance with law.