Mathan Cars Decors Vs the Authorized Officer

¶1

W.P.No.18194 of 2025

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 16.05.2025

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE G.R. SWAMINATHAN AND THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V. LAKSHMINARAYANAN

¶6

W.P.No.18194 of 2025 and W.M.P.No.20372 of 2025

¶7

Mathan Cars Decors represented by its Proprietrix M. Sangeetha No.286/8 Madurai Bye Pass Road NH 7, Near Vanitha Valaham East Andan Koil Karur 639 002 Petitioner

¶8

vs.

¶9

The Authorised Officer Indian Bank Car Street Karur District 639 002

¶10

Respondent

¶11

Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India

¶12

seeking a writ of mandamus directing the respondent bank not to confirm the sale conducted by it on 30.04.2025 and permit the petitioner to pay the dues in a period of eight weeks.

¶13

For petitioner Mrs. Ananda Gomathy for Ms. K. Jayaganga For respondent Mr. T. Sundar Rajan

¶14

- - - - -

¶15

Page Nos.1/8

¶16

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶17

W.P.No.18194 of 2025

¶18

ORDER

¶19

(made by G.R. SWAMINATHAN, J.)

¶20

The petitioner herein availed financial assistance from the respondent bank. The petitioner committed default. The petitioner had offered as many as three items of properties as secured assets. Since owing to the default committed by the petitioner, the account became a non-performing asset (NPA), proceedings under the SARFAESI Act were initiated.

¶21

The petition-mentioned property was the subject matter of auction sale on 30.04.2025. In the meanwhile, the petitioner filed S.A.No.449 of 2025 before the Debts Recovery Tribunal, Coimbatore. Before the Debts Recovery Tribunal, Coimbatore, the petitioner had filed an affidavit of undertaking dated 01.05.2025 to pay a sum of Rs.2.63 crores to save the petition-mentioned property.

¶22

Page Nos.2/8

¶23

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶24

W.P.No.18194 of 2025

¶25

Based on the petitioner's affidavit of undertaking, the Debts Recovery Tribunal, Coimbatore, passed an order dated 01.05.2025. The scanned reproduction of the operative portion of the order dated 01.05.2025 is as follows:

¶26

Page Nos.3/8

¶27

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶28

W.P.No.18194 of 2025

¶29

Unfortunately, the petitioner could not abide by the terms

¶30

of affidavit of undertaking. The amount of Rs.2.63 crores should have been paid on or before 15.05.2025 in two instalments. Since the

¶31

petitioner was not in a position to pay the said amount and since she was not in a position to move the Debts Recovery Tribunal, Coimbatore once again, seeking extension of time, this writ petition has come to be filed seeking a writ of mandamus directing the respondent bank not to confirm the sale conducted by it on 30.04.2025 and permit the petitioner to pay the dues in a period of eight weeks.

¶32

Heard Mrs. Ananda Gomathy, learned counsel representing

¶33

Mrs. K. Jayaganga, learned counsel on record for the petitioner and Mr.T. Sundar Rajan, learned Standing Counsel for the respondent bank.

¶34

This writ petition was filed on 12.05.2025. It was listed for admission on 14.05.2025. Since the sale confirmation took place after the writ petition was filed before this Court, we are of the view that the confirmation proceedings is also subject to the outcome of this writ petition.

¶35

Page Nos.4/8

¶36

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶37

W.P.No.18194 of 2025

¶38

The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the

¶39

petitioner undertakes to pay the sum of Rs.2.63 crores and also interest @ 18% per annum on the sum of Rs.72,30,750/-, being the amount deposited by the auction purchaser, within a period of four weeks from today.

¶40

Since the petitioner had already shown her bona fides by paying a sum of Rs.27,12,300/-, we are of the view that some indulgence can be shown. This is more so because in the petitionmentioned premises, the petitioner has been running her car service business and the petitioner is critically dependent on this property for her very livelihood.

¶41

Accordingly, the undertaking given today by the petitioner through her counsel, is recorded. It is made clear that in the event of the petitioner failing to honour the undertaking given before us today, sale confirmation already issued by the respondent bank shall hold good. On the contrary, if the petitioner abides by the undertaking given before us, the sale confirmation will stand cancelled but even

¶42

Page Nos.5/8

¶43

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶44

W.P.No.18194 of 2025

¶45

thereafter, the property will continue to remain securitised with the respondent bank.

¶46