Disposed

P.Shanthi v. Canara Bank

Madras HC21 Jun 2024WP(MD)/13157/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A borrower who defaulted on a bank loan and faced SARFAESI auction sought quashing of the Chief Judicial Magistrate's Section 14 order and time to settle dues. Having paid part amounts, the High Court disposed of the writ petition granting grace period up to 31.07.2024 to pay the balance.

What did the court decide?

Grace period up to 31.07.2024 granted to pay balance Rs.37,20,000; benefit auto-recalled on default; no costs.

P.Shanthi Vs Canara Bank — Banking and Recovery | Madras HC (2024)

¶1

W.P(MD)No.13157 of 2024

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED : 21.06.2024

¶4

CORAM :

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR.R.MAHADEVAN, ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE and THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN

¶6

W.P(MD)No.13157 of 2024 and W.M.P(MD)No.11659 of 2024

P.Shanthi

... Petitioner

vs.

Canara Bank, Rep by its Authorised Officer, ARM Branch, 1^st Floor, Circle Office, East Veli Street, Madurai.

¶11

... Respondent

¶12

Prayer : Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records relating to impugned proceedings of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Tirunelveli, vide Cr.MP.No. 2689 of 2023, dated 13.03.2023, and to quash the same as illegal consequently directing respondent bank to consider the request of the petitioner by providing grace period for the settlement of the outstanding amount as per the OTS Sanction letter issued by the respondent bank vide sanction letter No.ARM MDU 417 IFG PKP 2023-24 dated 13.02.2024.

¶13

Page No.1 of 4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶14

W.P(MD)No.13157 of 2024

¶15

For Petitioner : Mr.M.Sankar For Respondent : Mr.M.Pethu Rajesh, Standing Counsel

¶16

ORDER

¶17

R.MAHADEVAN, A.C.J. AND G.R.SWAMINATHAN, J.

¶18

Heard both sides.

¶19

The petitioner had availed loan from the respondent. She committed default. The respondent took recourse to SARFAESI proceedings. Order was passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Tirunelveli District, under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act. In fact, on 16.03.2024, the Bank had offered one time settlement. The petitioner was called upon to pay a sum of Rs.55 Lakhs plus Rs.3 Lakhs towards full and final settlement of dues. The petitioner had paid a sum of Rs.5,80,000/-. The balance Rs.49,20,000/- was to be paid in three instalments. Since the petitioner failed to do so, the property was brought to auction. The property was proposed to be sold for a sum of Rs.50,00,000/-. Since the petitioner is ready to adhere to the one time settlement offer and also to pay costs and interest, the interest of the Bank will be secured by granting grace period to the petitioner herein.

¶20

Page No.2 of 4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶21

W.P(MD)No.13157 of 2024

¶22

The petitioner had shown her bonafides by paying a sum of Rs.15,00,000/- by way of demand draft. The demand draft was handed over, in our presence, to the Bank counsel. The interest and costs have accumulated to a sum of Rs.3,00,000/- in the meanwhile. Thus, the balance amount payable by the petitioner is quantified at Rs.37,20,000/-. The petitioner undertakes to pay a sum of Rs.10,00,000/- before the end of this month(30.06.2024) and the balance amount of Rs.27,20,000/- will be paid on or before 31.07.2024.

¶23

Thus, the Writ Petition is disposed of, by granting grace period upto 31.07.2024. If the petitioner fails to adhere to the undertaking now given before this Court, the benefit of this order would stand recalled automatically and the petitioner will be relegated to the position that obtained when the writ petition was filed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

¶24

[R.M.D., A.C.J.] & [G.R.S., J.] 21.06.2024

¶25

Index : Yes / No Neutral Citation : Yes / No bala

¶26

Page No.3 of 4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶27

W.P(MD)No.13157 of 2024

¶28

R.MAHADEVAN, A.C.J. AND G.R.SWAMINATHAN, J.

¶29

bala

¶30

W.P(MD)No.13157 of 2024

¶31

21.06.2024

¶32

Page No.4 of 4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

P.Shanthi v. Canara Bank

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

P.Shanthi v. Canara Bank

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

M/s. Arulmighu Thiru Neelakanda Nayanar Mayandi Swamigal Trust Vs The District Collector / Chairman

Mounasamy Vs The District Collector

Ramar .R Vs The District Collector

Shyed Rabiya M Vs The Registrar General, High Court of Madras