Dismissed

Bani Hazarika v. Bank of Baroda and 2 Ors.

Gauhati HC9 Sept 2019WP(C)/6687/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner sought a direction to the respondent bank to allow a specific deposit and time period as part of a compromised settlement of a SARFAESI Act notice. The court held that compromise settlements are between the borrower and lender and the High Court cannot mandate a specific settlement manner via a writ of mandamus, dismissing the application.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the respondent bank to allow deposit of 10% of Rs. 90,61,000/- within one month and grant 12 months time for the balance.

Bani Hazarika Vs Bank of Baroda and 2 Ors. — Contract and Commercial Disputes | Gauhati HC (2019)

¶1

Page No.# 1/2

¶2

GAHC010218012019

¶3

THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

¶4

Case No. : WP(C) 6687/2019

¶5

1:BANI HAZARIKA

¶6

S/O LT. HAREN HAZARIKA, R/O VILL. KAMALABARI, MAJULI, P.O. KAMALABARI, DIST. MAJULI, PIN-785106, ASSAM, PRESENTLY RESIDING AT NEAR TARAZAN KAKOTI GAON, MAIN GATE, TARAZAN, P.O. JORHAT, DIST. JORHAT, ASSAM, PIN-7851001

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

1:BANK OF BARODA GOVT. OF INDIA UNDERTAKING HAVING ITS REGISTERED HEAD OFFICE AT MANDVI, BARADA CORPORATE CENTER BANDRA CAROLA COMPLEX, MUMBAI-400051, REP. BY ITS CHAIRMAN

¶9

2:THE ASSISTANT GENERAL MANAGER BANK OF BARODA REGIONAL OFFICE JORHAT A.T.ROAD P.O. JORHAT DIST. JORHAT ASSAM PIN-785001

¶10

3:THE BRANCH MANAGER BANK OF BARODA JORHAT BRANCH GAR-ALI (OPP. ELEY CINEMA) JORHAT P.O. JORHAT DIST. JORHAT ASSAM PIN-78500

¶11

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. P K GOSWAMI

¶12

Advocate for the Respondent :

¶13

BEFORE

¶14

HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE (ACTING) HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MANISH CHOUDHURY

¶15

ORDER

¶16

Date : 09-09-2019

¶17

[A.K. Goswami, CJ (Acting).]

¶18

Heard Ms. M. Borah, learned counsel for the petitioner.

¶19

A notice dated 13.02.2017 under Section 13(2) of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Securities Interest Act, 2002 (for short, “SARFAESI Act”) was issued to the petitioner by the respondent Bank for an

¶20

Page No.# 2/2

¶21

aggregate sum of ` 1,72,78,928/-. Subsequently, a notice under Section 13(4) of the SARFAESI Act was issued as against which the petitioner approached the learned Debt Recovery Tribunal, Guwahati and the said appeal was registered and numbered as S.A. No.33/2019. The appeal was dismissed by an order passed on 24.05.2019.

¶22

It is submitted by Ms. Borah that subsequent to dismissal of the appeal, the petitioner had submitted a proposal towards arriving at a compromise settlement by offering an amount of at 75 Lakhs to be paid in 12(twelve) months. In pursuance of the said proposal, a meeting was also apparently convened on 20.08.2019 and according to the statements made in Paragraph 13 of the writ petition, the respondent Bank offered the petitioner a negotiated amount of 90 Lakhs with initial deposit of 25% of the total amount within 1(one) month and thereafter, to pay the balance amount within a period of 3(three) months.

¶23

Ms. Borah has, however, submitted that the amount was wrongly written as 90 Lakhs but the same ought to have been typed out as 90,61,000/-.

¶24

The petitioner by the this application prays for a direction to the respondent Bank to allow him to deposit 10% of the amount of ` 90,61,000/- within 1(one) month and to grant 12(twelve) months time for payment of the balance amount.

¶25

How a compromise is to be arrived is entirely between the borrower and the lender.

¶26

In an application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, in a matter of the present nature, this Court cannot issue a writ of mandamus, as prayed for, directing the Bank to arrive at a settlement in a particular manner. As such, we find no merit in this application and accordingly, the same shall stand dismissed.

¶27

Sd/- JUDGE

¶28

Sd/- CHIEF JUSTICE (ACTING)

¶29

Comparing Assistant

Bani Hazarika v. Bank of Baroda and 2 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bani Hazarika v. Bank of Baroda and 2 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Joshna Narzary Vs the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

Sri Luish Aind Vs Mrs. Susana Bara

Mazibar Rahman Vs Nazrul Hussain and 6 Ors.

Nazimuddin Ahmed Vs Pritam Saikia and 2 Ors.

Sri Biswa Kamal Duarah Vs the State of Assam and 6 Ors.

Rashid Ahmed Laskar Vs the State of Assam and 6 Ors.