Dismissed

P.K. Radhakrishnan v. Central Bank Of India

Madras HC28 Jul 2017WP/18658/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court was approached via a writ petition to restrain the bank from issuing a Sale Certificate for an auctioned property as the bidder had not paid the balance amount. The court found the relief infructuous after an earlier connected case was disposed of because the bank paid the balance amount and issued the certificate to the auction purchaser before the present petition was heard.

What did the court decide?

None. The relief was dismissed because the sale certificate had already been issued to the auction purchaser due to payment in a connected case, making the current writ infructuous.

P.K. Radhakrishnan Vs Central Bank Of India — Banking and Recovery | Madras HC (2017)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED: 28.07.2017

¶3

CORAM:

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.MANIKUMAR and

¶5

THE HONOURABLE TMT.JUSTICE V.BHAVANI SUBBAROYAN

¶6

W.P.No.18658 of 2017

¶7

and
WMP No.20196 of 2017
P.K.Radhakrishnan ... Petitioner
versus
1.Central Bank of India
Asset Recovery Branch
48/49, Ground Floor
Montieth Road
Egmore, Chennai - 600 008
2.S.Rajasekar
3.Mrs.R.Vijaya
4.R.Kishore ... Respondents

¶8

Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for a Writ of Mandamus, forbearing the 1st respondent from issuing the Sale Certificate to the respondents 2 to 4, for the property situated in Plot No.1382, 10th Street, Off 18th Main Road, 1st Block, Anna Nagar (West), Chennai - 600 040 admeasuring about 1 Ground 2275 sq.ft. along with building having built up area of 3240 sq.ft. pursuant to the auction sale conducted by the 1st respondent bank on 13.03.2017.

¶9

Borrower has sought for a mandamus, forbearing the 1st respondent from issuing a Sale Certificate to the respondents 2 to 4, for the property situated in Plot No.1382, 10th Street, Off 18th Main Road, 1st Block, Anna Nagar (West), https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ Chennai - 600 040 admeasuring about 1 Ground 2275 sq.ft. along

¶10

with building having built up area of 3240 sq.ft. pursuant to the auction sale conducted by the 1st respondent bank on 13.03.2017, on the grounds inter alia that when balance 75% of the sale amount was not paid within the prescribed period provided therefor.

¶11

Even at the time, when the matter came up for admission, we indicated, if that be the case, it is always open to the borrower/writ petitioner, to challenge the Sale Certificate, if issued. Nevertheless, Mr.S.Ravi, learned counsel for the borrower, requested for notice and thus on 21.07.2017, we ordered notice to the respondents, returnable by 26.06.2017.

¶12

Reverting, Mr.M.L.Ganesh, learned counsel for the bank/1st respondent, submitted that earlier, When the Auction Purchaser Mr.S.Rajasekaran filed W.P.No.16227 of 2017 for a mandamus directing the Authorised Officer, Central Bank of India, Asset Recovery Branch, Chennai, not to forfeit the sale amount of Rs.1,22,07,500/- deposited by him, pursuant to the e-auction sale conducted by the respondent bank on 13.03.2017 and extend the time to pay the balance sale amount for a sum of Rs.3,66,22,500/- to the respondent bank, this court, vide order dated 29.06.2017, passed the following order:

¶13

" This writ petition has been filed seeking a direction to the respondent Bank not to forfeit the sale amount for a sum of Rs.1,22,07,500/- deposited by the petitioner pursuant to the e-auction sale conducted by the respondent bank on 13.3.2017 and to extend the time to pay the balance sale amount for a sum of Rs.3,66,22,500/- to the respondent Bank.

¶14

Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned counsel appearing for the respondent Bank.

¶15

The respondent issued e-auction sale notice for selling the property mortgaged by a borrower in e-auction, since the borrower had failed to repay the amount. In the said auction held on 13.3.2017, the petitioner is the successful bidder and he paid 25% of the sale price. The petitioner applied for loan to pay the balance sale consideration and the bank has sanctioned the loan. However, the Bank could not release the amount, since the property was attached due to some third party claims. Though the petitioner made several requests to the respondent to take steps to raise the order of attachment and to issue and register the sale certificate in his favour, the respondent, without taking steps to raise the order of attachment, demanded the petitioner to pay the balance sale price, failing which, it would forfeit 25% of the sale price paid by the petitioner. Aggrieved by the said order, the https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ petitioner has come up with the above writ petition.

¶16

When the matter is taken up for hearing, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has paid the balance sale price and the respondent has also issued the sale certificate in favour of the petitioner on 28.6.2017.

¶17

In view of the above, this writ petition is disposed of, recording the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and directing the respondent to register the sale certificate issued in favour of the petitioner. However, there shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, WMP No.17544 of 2017 is closed."

¶18

In compliance of the orders stated supra, Auction Purchaser, S.Rajasekaran/Respondent No.2, in the present writ petition, has paid balance 75% to the auction purchaser on 28.06.2017, within the permitted time and sale certificate has been issued on the same day.

¶19

In view of the above, learned counsel for the bank, submitted that mandamus sought for, has become infructuous.

¶20

Mr.S.Ravi, learned counsel for the borrower, prays for a direction to the bank, to furnish a copy of the sale certificate. Mr.M.L.Ganesh, learned counsel for the respondent bank, submitted that no sooner the borrower approaches the bank with a request, the same would be furnished.

¶21

Placing on record the above submission, the writ petition is dismissed. However, there shall be no order as to cost. Consequently, the connected writ miscellaneous petition is closed.

¶22

Sd/-

¶23

Assistant Registrar(CS VI)

¶24

//True Copy//

¶25

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶26

asr

¶27

Central Bank of India Asset Recovery Branch 48/49, Ground Floor Montieth Road Egmore, Chennai - 600 008.

¶28

1 cc to Mr.M.L. Ganesh, Advocate Sr.54139

¶29

W.P.No.18658 of 2017 and WMP No.20196 of 2017

¶30

PA(CO) https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ EU 24.08.17

P.K. Radhakrishnan v. Central Bank Of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

P.K. Radhakrishnan v. Central Bank Of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/s.Asveens Forging Pvt.Ltd., Vs The Registrar

Commissioner of Income Tax Vs Lucas Tvs Ltd.

Kovai Periyar District Dravida Vs M/s.v.R.Textiles Pvt. Ltd.

M.Nazneen, Vs The Authorized Officer

M.Krishna Vs The Registrar

The Commissioner of Customs Vs M/S. Kannabiran Steel Re-