W.P. challenging bank demand alleging wrongful capitalization and misuse of GECLS scheme. Court held it is a defense for civil litigation, not for Article 226. Directs parties to avail remedies under SARFAESI Act.
The writ petition was disposed of; parties directed to avail remedies under the SARFAESI Act, 2002.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
OD-2
ORDER SHEET IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE
WPO/1202/2022
ARIANCE INDUSTRIES PRIVATE LIMITED VERSUS UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.
BEFORE:
The Hon'ble JUSTICE RAJASEKHAR MANTHA Date : 23rd March, 2022
Appearance: Mr. Mainak Bose, Sr. Adv. Mr. Neeraj Kumar Pandey, Adv. Mr. Shakeel Mohammed Akhter, Adv. … for the petitioner.
Mr. Om Narayan Rai, Adv. Mr. Saikat Roy Chowdhury, Adv. … for the Indian bank.
Mr. Tapan Bhanja, Adv. … for the UOI.
The Court :- The petitioner claims that the respondent bank has wrongfully capitalized interest in its loan account. It is also submitted that the benefit of a scheme called Guaranteed Emergency Credit Line (GECLS) in view of Covid-19 has been misapplied to the petitioner. The petitioner seeks quashing of demands raised by the bank. The bank, in addition to denying the claims of the petitioner, submits that the petitioner has admitted his entire liability. It is also submitted that even for the sake of argument, if the capitalization is reversed, the account would still be overdue and have become a non-performing asset.
This Court is of the view that the petitioner’s claim is at best a defense to any claim which the bank may lodge against him. Even assuming for the sake of argument that the petitioner may have claimed against the bank, the same
2
cannot be adjudicated under Article 226 of the Constitution of India given the large number of disputed questions of fact which are required to be gone into.
Since it is submitted by the Counsel for the petitioner that notice under Section 13(2) of the SARFAESI Act, 2002 has already been issued, the petitioner may avail, inter alia, appropriate remedies under the SARFAESI Act, 2002 against such proceedings.
With the aforesaid observations, WPO No. 1202 of 2022 is, accordingly, disposed of.
(RAJASEKHAR MANTHA, J.)
mg/S. Chandra
2 issues framed by the court
Whether disputed questions of fact regarding loan accounting and capitalization can be adjudicated under Article 226.
Whether appropriate remedies exist under the SARFAESI Act, 2002 for acting against proceedings initiated under Section 13(2).
2 provisions across 2 enactments
ARIANCE INDUSTRIES PRIVATE LIMITED
UNION OF INDIA
INDIAN BANK
RAJASEKHAR MANTHA
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
