M/s. Trishul Agency vs State Bank of India and others

Hon''ble V.K. Bist, J.—Heard learned counsel for the parties.

The petitioner, by means of this writ petition, has prayed for a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari to quash the order dated 30.9.2010 passed by respondent No. 4/District Magistrate, Nainital.

Brief facts giving rise to the present case are that in the year 2007-08, the petitioner firm took a loan of Rs. 5,00,000/- from the respondent Bank, but on account of some unavoidable circumstances, he could not repay the entire loan amount. On 30.4.2009, respondent No. 2 served a notice upon the petitioner u/s 13(2) of Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest (Second) Act, 2002 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) asking him to repay the liabilities. Pursuant to said notice, the petitioner deposited a total sum of Rs. 1,15,000/- in parts on different dates. Since the whole amount had yet not been deposited, respondent No. 1 initiated proceedings u/s 14 of the Act against the petitioner and secured orders on 30.9.2010 for physical possession of the mortgaged property. After coming to know about the said proceeding, the proprietor of the petitioner firm immediately secured a copy of the said order. Apart from this, prior to it, the proprietor of the petitioner firm approached the Bank authorities as well in order to accept the balance shown in the bank statement i.e. Rs. 2,13,811.76, but the Manager of the respondent Bank did not accept the said amount, rather informed the proprietor of the petitioner firm that the balance in the account is Rs. 4,13,632/-.

Today, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner firm is ready to deposit the entire amount along with interest in easy equal installments. Learned counsel for the respondent Bank has also submitted that the Bank will have no objection, in case, the entire amount with interest and other charges is deposited in installments, but he submitted that the first installment should be deposited within ten days.

Considering the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, it is directed that no coercive steps shall be taken against the petitioner, in case the petitioner deposits the entire amount with interest and other charges in four equal installments. It is made clear that the first installment will be deposited within 10 days from today and rest installments will be deposited equally on or before 31st March, 2012, 31st May, 2012 and 30th June, 2012. It is also made clear that in case of any default in payment of the installments, the order passed by this Court shall stand vacated and the respondent Bank will be entitled to recover the entire amount from the petitioner.

With the aforesaid direction, the instant writ petition is disposed of.

All the pending applications are also disposed of.